Look, couldn't we just have Bush and bin Laden settle their feud with a Roman gladiator-style battle to the death? The money raised from ticket sales, international pay-per-view sales, T-shirts, and so on, could be paid directly to the poorest people on both sides. Whoever survived the match could be fed to the lions.
Fuck them both.
Friday, October 29, 2004
Idiosyncracies of this election
When people talk about this election many years hence, I hope they don't forget small, seemingly inconsequential but nevertheless interesting developments like this:
Bush relatives for Kerry.
And this:
Billionaires for Bush or Kerry. Not sure if they're affiliated with the satirical group "Billionaires for Bush," which seems to be lacking a web presence at the moment. In any case, the latter was funnier, though there were people on both sides who didn't get the satire.
Bush relatives for Kerry.
And this:
Billionaires for Bush or Kerry. Not sure if they're affiliated with the satirical group "Billionaires for Bush," which seems to be lacking a web presence at the moment. In any case, the latter was funnier, though there were people on both sides who didn't get the satire.
Wednesday, October 27, 2004
Woolsey's wool / our eyes
Did anyone else find it strange that former CIA director James Woolsey used the word "totalitarians" to describe al Qaeda on last Friday's installment of Real Time with Bill Maher?
Don't you need some sort of massive state apparatus behind you to qualify as a "totalitarian"? Wouldn't a "totalitarian" organization or government be relatively easy to locate? (It would presumably have to be fairly massive and immobile to enforce its ideology.)
The assumption that al Qaeda was and is such an entity is, as George Paine argues today at Warblogging.com, one of the major miscalculations of the Bush administration. Al Qaeda is not a totalitarian organization, it is a "non state actor." That is, the goal is the same (followers of Hitler and followers of bin Laden both want the same thing: "to take over the world," as cartoon villains put it), but the means for accomplishing that goal are very, very different. Mistaking "non state actors" for "totalitarians," we've gotten bogged down in precisely the war that al Qaeda wanted us to fight; it's one that will misuse and sap our resources, inflame and motivate our enemies, and finally threaten to exhaust us as a nation.
As Paine puts it at the end of his piece:
"These are gigantic miscalculations in the War on Terror. They are the greatest mistakes that could have been made. They are fundamental misunderstandings of the problem America faces. The actions and assumptions taken by the Bush Administration were exactly wrong. [...] The Bush Administration shows no sign of learning. We have six days until we learn whether the American people have learned. Think before you vote."
Don't you need some sort of massive state apparatus behind you to qualify as a "totalitarian"? Wouldn't a "totalitarian" organization or government be relatively easy to locate? (It would presumably have to be fairly massive and immobile to enforce its ideology.)
The assumption that al Qaeda was and is such an entity is, as George Paine argues today at Warblogging.com, one of the major miscalculations of the Bush administration. Al Qaeda is not a totalitarian organization, it is a "non state actor." That is, the goal is the same (followers of Hitler and followers of bin Laden both want the same thing: "to take over the world," as cartoon villains put it), but the means for accomplishing that goal are very, very different. Mistaking "non state actors" for "totalitarians," we've gotten bogged down in precisely the war that al Qaeda wanted us to fight; it's one that will misuse and sap our resources, inflame and motivate our enemies, and finally threaten to exhaust us as a nation.
As Paine puts it at the end of his piece:
"These are gigantic miscalculations in the War on Terror. They are the greatest mistakes that could have been made. They are fundamental misunderstandings of the problem America faces. The actions and assumptions taken by the Bush Administration were exactly wrong. [...] The Bush Administration shows no sign of learning. We have six days until we learn whether the American people have learned. Think before you vote."
"Free" / dumb
Found this amazing paragraph at the American Library Association website a few minutes ago. It's a German professor's description of the coming of fascism in the early part of the twentieth century, as excerpted in Milton Mayer's book They Thought They Were Free:
“What happened was the gradual habituation of the people, little by little, to be governed by surprise, to receiving decisions deliberated in secret; to believe that the situation was so complicated that the government had to act on information which the people could not understand, or so dangerous that, even if people could understand it, it could not be released because of national security. [...] The crises and reforms (real reforms too) so occupied the people that they did not see the slow motion underneath, of the whole process of government growing remoter and remoter. [...] To live in the process is absolutely not to notice it — please try to believe me — unless one has a much greater degree of political awareness, acuity, than most of us ever had occasion to develop. Each step was so small, so inconsequential, so well explained or, on occasion, ‘regretted.’ [...] Believe me this is true. Each act, each occasion is worse than the last, but only a little worse. You wait for the next and the next. You wait for one shocking occasion, thinking that others, when such a shock comes, will join you in resisting somehow. [...] Suddenly it all comes down, all at once. You see what you are, what you have done, or, more accurately, what you haven't done (for that was all that was required of most of us: that we did nothing) . . . You remember everything now, and your heart breaks. Too late. You are compromised beyond repair.”
“What happened was the gradual habituation of the people, little by little, to be governed by surprise, to receiving decisions deliberated in secret; to believe that the situation was so complicated that the government had to act on information which the people could not understand, or so dangerous that, even if people could understand it, it could not be released because of national security. [...] The crises and reforms (real reforms too) so occupied the people that they did not see the slow motion underneath, of the whole process of government growing remoter and remoter. [...] To live in the process is absolutely not to notice it — please try to believe me — unless one has a much greater degree of political awareness, acuity, than most of us ever had occasion to develop. Each step was so small, so inconsequential, so well explained or, on occasion, ‘regretted.’ [...] Believe me this is true. Each act, each occasion is worse than the last, but only a little worse. You wait for the next and the next. You wait for one shocking occasion, thinking that others, when such a shock comes, will join you in resisting somehow. [...] Suddenly it all comes down, all at once. You see what you are, what you have done, or, more accurately, what you haven't done (for that was all that was required of most of us: that we did nothing) . . . You remember everything now, and your heart breaks. Too late. You are compromised beyond repair.”
Tuesday, October 26, 2004
Hack-tivism
George Orwell would probably be astonished at the accuracy of his predictions.
The linguistic looseness of this presidential campaign (Bush, Inc.: "X." America: "Why did you say 'X'?" Bush, Inc.: "I never said 'X.'"), for instance, has really put the screws to any semblance of critical discourse in this country. Power accrues not to those who use language for the purpose of reasoning, but to those who use it as an instrument of forceful definition. George Lakoff has some interesting things to say about this process (and how to counter it) in his latest book.
But it's not just presidential politics. I find it amazing, for instance, that the RIAA has managed to turn "sharing" into a dirty word.
The point of this post, however, is to reference this site, the purpose of which is to "reclaim the term 'hacking' for the good guys--innovators who explore and experiment, unearth shortcuts, create useful tools, and come up with fun things to try on their own."
Lots of neat publications there.
The linguistic looseness of this presidential campaign (Bush, Inc.: "X." America: "Why did you say 'X'?" Bush, Inc.: "I never said 'X.'"), for instance, has really put the screws to any semblance of critical discourse in this country. Power accrues not to those who use language for the purpose of reasoning, but to those who use it as an instrument of forceful definition. George Lakoff has some interesting things to say about this process (and how to counter it) in his latest book.
But it's not just presidential politics. I find it amazing, for instance, that the RIAA has managed to turn "sharing" into a dirty word.
The point of this post, however, is to reference this site, the purpose of which is to "reclaim the term 'hacking' for the good guys--innovators who explore and experiment, unearth shortcuts, create useful tools, and come up with fun things to try on their own."
Lots of neat publications there.
Monday, October 25, 2004
Chop up a film, put it back together
Check out this cool contest, courtesy the good folks at free culture.
If I get my shit together, I may make an IJG entry for this. I've been meaning to make videos for some of our stuff anyway...
If I get my shit together, I may make an IJG entry for this. I've been meaning to make videos for some of our stuff anyway...
Thursday, October 21, 2004
The kids may be alright, but they're oversexed
Maybe I'm just getting old, but I can't think of any context less erotic than the aftermath of an election that revolves around two wrinkled rich white geezers:
www.votergasm.org
I can only hope that there is some truth to the stereotype that Republicans are frigid and repressed (and thus unlikely to participate in this, er, drive).
www.votergasm.org
I can only hope that there is some truth to the stereotype that Republicans are frigid and repressed (and thus unlikely to participate in this, er, drive).
Wednesday, October 20, 2004
The Kids Are Alright
This supports my contention that kids have more common sense than most adults.
Now if only they could really vote.
Now if only they could really vote.
Wednesday, October 13, 2004
How 'bout that spittle?
Anybody notice the buildup of froth at the corner of the president's mouth tonight as he regurgitated the ready-made phrases that had been prepared for him by Karl Rove and Dick Cheney?
A perfect metaphor for how the Bush campaign is (fingers crossed here) starting to come apart at the seams.
And Larry King--of all people!--actually had a poignant question for Rudy Guiliani: if Kerry really represents a position so far outside of the mainstream in America, how is it that he can be doing so well in the polls?
One other thing: a sign seen in the background during MSNBC's coverage of the debate. It read: "Screw Iraq, I Need a Job!"
And so say we all.
A perfect metaphor for how the Bush campaign is (fingers crossed here) starting to come apart at the seams.
And Larry King--of all people!--actually had a poignant question for Rudy Guiliani: if Kerry really represents a position so far outside of the mainstream in America, how is it that he can be doing so well in the polls?
One other thing: a sign seen in the background during MSNBC's coverage of the debate. It read: "Screw Iraq, I Need a Job!"
And so say we all.
Wednesday, October 06, 2004
An oldie but goodie...
I just came across an interesting and underemphasized point on the RIAA lawsuits: “What would be obscene (and immoral on good Kantian principles) would be for the government to prosecute a few 'copyright violators' selectively, as an example to others. If they are going to actually enforce the NET Act, they ought to go after all ten or twenty million of us-an attempt to do which would, of course, bring the entire justice and prison systems to a state of complete paralysis. Selective enforcement of a law is unconstitutional (since it violates equal protection) and unjust; a law that can only be enforced selectively is itself unjust.” Though Steven Shaviro made this point almost two years ago, I haven't seen or heard it anywhere else. In other words, it hasn't really entered the debate.
Here's the link: http://www.shaviro.com/Blog/archives/000029.html.
Here's the link: http://www.shaviro.com/Blog/archives/000029.html.
Tuesday, October 05, 2004
Wednesday, September 29, 2004
In Canada They're Called "Smarties"
Earlier this week Bush mocked Kerry by saying that the latter could "debate himself." The administration got a lot of mileage out of that one, but what a sad comment on their attitude toward intelligence. I mean, I get the joke, but isn't this also a roundabout way of trashing introspection, deliberation, critical consciousness? Shouldn't we have the ability to "debate ourselves" before making any important decision? Otherwise, aren't we just going through the motions?
Speaking of the role of intelligence in this campaign:
Scientists Appear to Tilt Toward Kerry
"First came the report accusing the Bush administration of politicizing science. Then came the letter from a bipartisan group of Nobel laureates endorsing John Kerry for president.
Now, from laboratories, classrooms, and boardrooms, comes Scientists and Engineers for Kerry, a group of researchers intent on unseating President Bush. Its goal: to recruit scientists and students to write letters and deliver speeches supporting the Kerry campaign."
Kelly Field, The Chronicle of Higher Education, October 1
And then there's this great piece by David Corn. A sample: "The Bush team has done a marvelous job of infantilizing the campaign. With Bush the Big Daddy you will be safe; with Kerry the Big Weenie, you are in peril. It’s that simple, and Bush and his lieutenants push simplicity as the ultimate virtue. They promote strength and steadfastness as the Olympian ideals—regardless of the ends to which these traits are applied—and deride thought, analysis and re-evaluation as evidence of impotence." And: "In my darker moments, I’ve often said that human interaction doesn’t evolve all that much past high school. In this campaign, the Bush clique is doing all it can to prove this theory correct. But it is the rest of the kids—I mean, the voters—who will determine if the politics of derision, big lying, fear mongering, simplicity and immaturity will work."
Smart guy.
Speaking of the role of intelligence in this campaign:
Scientists Appear to Tilt Toward Kerry
"First came the report accusing the Bush administration of politicizing science. Then came the letter from a bipartisan group of Nobel laureates endorsing John Kerry for president.
Now, from laboratories, classrooms, and boardrooms, comes Scientists and Engineers for Kerry, a group of researchers intent on unseating President Bush. Its goal: to recruit scientists and students to write letters and deliver speeches supporting the Kerry campaign."
Kelly Field, The Chronicle of Higher Education, October 1
And then there's this great piece by David Corn. A sample: "The Bush team has done a marvelous job of infantilizing the campaign. With Bush the Big Daddy you will be safe; with Kerry the Big Weenie, you are in peril. It’s that simple, and Bush and his lieutenants push simplicity as the ultimate virtue. They promote strength and steadfastness as the Olympian ideals—regardless of the ends to which these traits are applied—and deride thought, analysis and re-evaluation as evidence of impotence." And: "In my darker moments, I’ve often said that human interaction doesn’t evolve all that much past high school. In this campaign, the Bush clique is doing all it can to prove this theory correct. But it is the rest of the kids—I mean, the voters—who will determine if the politics of derision, big lying, fear mongering, simplicity and immaturity will work."
Smart guy.
Monday, September 27, 2004
New York, New York
Gotta be brief but before I forget:
The IJG will be on WNYC this coming Wednesday evening. We'll be featured in a program of large ensemble music played during John Schaefer's New Sounds program.
Even though I still haven't figured out the trick of making this group financially lucrative, getting on New Sounds is something of a personal milestone for me; the show was an important source of new music for the pimply-faced suburban high school kid that I used to be. And although I don't get to listen now that I'm in LA, I'll bet it's still one of the best programs of its kind. (Don't believe the hype: L.A.'s "Morning Becomes Eclectic" is one of the most overrated new music shows ever.)
The IJG will be on WNYC this coming Wednesday evening. We'll be featured in a program of large ensemble music played during John Schaefer's New Sounds program.
Even though I still haven't figured out the trick of making this group financially lucrative, getting on New Sounds is something of a personal milestone for me; the show was an important source of new music for the pimply-faced suburban high school kid that I used to be. And although I don't get to listen now that I'm in LA, I'll bet it's still one of the best programs of its kind. (Don't believe the hype: L.A.'s "Morning Becomes Eclectic" is one of the most overrated new music shows ever.)
Friday, September 17, 2004
The Eyes Have It
Did Rembrandt have extropia? Some scholars think so.
My favorite quotation from this piece: "[Rembrandt's condition] illustrates that disabilities are not always disabilities. They may be assets in another realm."
My favorite quotation from this piece: "[Rembrandt's condition] illustrates that disabilities are not always disabilities. They may be assets in another realm."
What a Difference Three Days Make
Apparently, according to whatever the latest polls are, Bush and Kerry are now neck-and-neck. At last, it seems, Kerry is starting to focus his attacks. Yesterday's speech to National Guard folks in Las Vegas was apparently pretty scathing; today's press release has Kerry stating: “It is clear: George W. Bush and Dick Cheney have mismanaged every aspect of the war in Iraq." Even that is putting it lightly, but anyway this statement is much more relevant than having to engage the Vietnam issue.
At least it's more relevant for people like this lady: "A woman wearing a T-shirt with the words 'President Bush You Killed My Son' and a picture of a soldier killed in Iraq was detained Thursday after she interrupted a campaign speech by First Lady Laura Bush."
At least it's more relevant for people like this lady: "A woman wearing a T-shirt with the words 'President Bush You Killed My Son' and a picture of a soldier killed in Iraq was detained Thursday after she interrupted a campaign speech by First Lady Laura Bush."
Thursday, September 16, 2004
Mal: Adroit
One of several things on the jukebox today: Mal Waldron's The Quest, recorded in 1961. With Waldron on piano and compositions, Eric Dolphy on alto and clarinet, Booker Ervin on tenor, Ron Carter on cello, Joe Benjamin on bass, Charlie Persip on drums.
The IJG has grown so much over the last year that it was a nice change when this last tour forced me to revisit the quintet format (because of space considerations at one of our gigs). To get in the mindset for that I started listening to a lot of small groups again, and Waldron's on this recording is one of the best I've come across. One might anticipate certain problems before checking them out. Ervin and Dolphy together, one might assume, would echo the intensity of each other's playing. Carter and Benjamin together would produce an excess of low frequency. But these fears are unjustified: it all works.
The tunes themselves are focused, minimalistic, haunting. There is an "unfinished" or "sketch-like" quality to many of them, but it doesn't register as a deficiency. In the end the quality of the tunes and the quality of the players makes it difficult to tell where the lead sheet ends and the improvisation begins.
Highly recommended.
The IJG has grown so much over the last year that it was a nice change when this last tour forced me to revisit the quintet format (because of space considerations at one of our gigs). To get in the mindset for that I started listening to a lot of small groups again, and Waldron's on this recording is one of the best I've come across. One might anticipate certain problems before checking them out. Ervin and Dolphy together, one might assume, would echo the intensity of each other's playing. Carter and Benjamin together would produce an excess of low frequency. But these fears are unjustified: it all works.
The tunes themselves are focused, minimalistic, haunting. There is an "unfinished" or "sketch-like" quality to many of them, but it doesn't register as a deficiency. In the end the quality of the tunes and the quality of the players makes it difficult to tell where the lead sheet ends and the improvisation begins.
Highly recommended.
Tuesday, September 14, 2004
You've got to be kidding me...
How is it that an election that should be a slam dunk in the Democrat's favor could possibly be going the way the polls claim it is? It's true that with each Bush fuckup the media tends to get quickly bored, even after an initial flurry of attention (is anyone even talking about Abu Ghraib anymore?). But Kerry / Edwards should be picking up each and every one of these stories and hammering them home. I mean, this stuff is gold! A stolen election, a superstitious and inept commander-in-chief, a war based on lies, a rising casualty list, a perversion of language that would shock even Orwell, etc., ad nauseum.
Siva Vaidhyanathan recently suggested that the Killian memos (assuming they turn out to be forgeries) could actually have been planted by the Bush campaign. I'll take that suspicion to a ridiculous extreme and wonder aloud if Bush isn't somehow getting Kerry to take a dive in this election. That's a completely outlandish idea, I admit, but at the moment it's no more outlandish to me than the idea that Bush could actually be ahead.
Of course, there's also the question of how reliable the polls actually are.
Siva Vaidhyanathan recently suggested that the Killian memos (assuming they turn out to be forgeries) could actually have been planted by the Bush campaign. I'll take that suspicion to a ridiculous extreme and wonder aloud if Bush isn't somehow getting Kerry to take a dive in this election. That's a completely outlandish idea, I admit, but at the moment it's no more outlandish to me than the idea that Bush could actually be ahead.
Of course, there's also the question of how reliable the polls actually are.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)