What a week! When Chang'e took off with samples from Luna's far side (congratulations!)...
... and Boeing's Starliner capsule finally made a crew delivery to the space station (with subsequent Helium leaks, alas)...
... and with epic success of the SpaceX Big Rocket system achieving soft (wet) landing... and its orbital stage surviving re-entry to do the same... which means the system WILL work, even if there are more bugs. Which means the cost of doing most things out there is about to plummet! (Oh, and I suppose we'll also get silly "Artemis" footprint stunts. Whatever. Zzzz...)
Meanwhile, let's get on with some news from 'out there' that you may not have noticed.
NASA is seeking public input on how to prioritize nearly 200 topics in space technology to improve how it invests limited funding on them. This is part of an effort by the agency’s Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD) to provide a more rigorous approach to how it supports technology development. (I served STMD for 12 years as part-time advisor to NASA’s Innovative & Advanced Concepts program – (NIAC).
Hey, just because I am (very!) skeptical of the snake oil that’s touted out there about (mostly-nonexistent) ‘lunar resources,’ that doesn’t mean there aren’t great riches , just a little farther out!
One company that got several highly touted projects from us at NIAC – TransAstra – is reviving interest in asteroid mining. (There had been a fad of early investors a decade ago - a bit premature, as I said at the time.) Now TransAstra is selling a telescope and software designed to detect objects like asteroids moving through the sky. And others are interested in the space rock ore-loads, like a Chinese corporation Origin Space that has an asteroid-observing satellite in orbit and is testing its mining-relevant technology there. Meanwhile, Colorado company Karman+ plans to go straight to an asteroid in 2026 and test excavation equipment.
Bouncing around out there... The brightest object in the universe? A Quasar – a galactic center black hole tucking in so much matter that it outshines whole galaxies is a monster visible in light from the earliest days… in this case 12 billion years ago, blaring 500 Trillion times as bright as our poor sun. Woof.
The Space Show is a mostly audio podcast run by David Livingston.* I especially recommend the episodes featuring my friend Joe Carroll, the most innovative and agile independent space engineer I know, who pioneered the use of tethers and long cables in orbit and has wise insights into problems like space debris, space power and how to create artificial gravity in the near term, out there.
*(I named a space station after Joe … but did I name the main character of Existence after this “Livingston”?)
== And yet MORE from out there! ==
Even more organic molecules than we previously realized are spewing from water volcano-jets out of Saturn’s moon Enceladus.
Uranus spins around its own axis at a highly unusual 98-degree tilt, giving it the "most extreme seasons in the solar system," per NASA. That means one pole spends 21 Earth years completely plunged in darkness as the Sun shines upon the other pole. This makes it a fascinating test of ideas bout tidal locked worlds, long a staple of SF. These images from the James Webb are truly amazing. Looking past the tiresomely tedious double entendres.
Researchers have found that key molecules needed for life (nucleic acid bases) are stable in concentrated sulfuric acid, advancing the notion that the Venus atmosphere environment may be able to support complex chemicals needed for life. (Thanks James Norris.) Note that Prof. Doug Van Belle’s fine novel “A World Adrift” is set amid human-built cloud cities floating amid and harvesting Venusian stratospheric life in a steam punk delight.
(And I have both a novella and a cool screenplay set under the oceans of Venus! Shall we say after some serious terraforming. ;-)
Wow. The recently-returned samples of asteroid Bennu appear to contain unexpected minerals that seem likely to have come from contact with liquid water! It suggests the parent-body - a planetoid that was shattered to form much of the asteroid belt long ago - might have been like Enceladus, Saturn’s moon that spumes water jets from a liquid ocean through volcanoes in an icy ‘roof’.
Side note: Our ability to peer back through time is amazing, like the Y-Chromosome ‘bottleneck’ telling of a brutal era for male-humans 8000 years ago…. Or new methods letting us read the charred scrolls recovered from Vesuvius-buried Herculaneum. Or your own 23&Me ancestry results.
And more to come… if the War on Science can be soundly defeated, that is. There are forces who especially don’t want us peering the other way, into the future. My specialty.
273 comments:
1 – 200 of 273 Newer› Newest»Our ability to peer back through time is amazing
Geology, archaeology, and anthropology are some of the most underrated branches of science. So many answers are possible. Of course that's really what big telescopes like Webb are all about too. Even outrageous ideas like ancient acoustic patterns being stored as molecular displacements in solid rock or even reconstruction of 'lost' civilizations such as Linear A era Crete (possibly using computational psychohistory).
And SF such Star Trek TOS's "City of the Edge of Forever", Jurassic Park, and Piers Anthony's "Macroscope". Even the "Foundation" timeline occasionally looks to the past.
" ancient acoustic patterns being stored as molecular displacements in solid rock..."
I've heard of trying to decode pottery as an inadvertent record of sounds that occurred during the shaping process of wet clay, but not sure what this refers to.
I do know that it should be possible to find the prevailing wind speed and direction prevalent during the formation of a pu'u using the placement and size of ejecta in the formation, but have never found any papers on the subject.
Pappenheimer
With regards to "computational psychohistory", which of course reminds me of Hari Seldon, pretty sure we've a ways to go on that front. I presume that you still have to have a database to build on, and the conclusions will be weaker the less evidence there is - in pre-literate civilizations like Mohenjo-Daro, we don't even have the name they called themselves; it's only in a few places like Troy where a name or two happens to pop up in legend and the records of local literate states (like the Hittite records suggesting a place named Wilusa/Taroisa (Ilium/Troy) actually had a king named Alexandrus). The Middle East in particular is positively littered with ghost cities - there's even a name for them: a 'tell' is the distinctive low-lying plateau caused by the garbage and dissolved mud brick/other building material a city without a sanitation department leaves behind.
DeCamp wrote some fun (dated) nonfiction on this
Pappenheimer
Adding to the collection:
The effort to clean up space proceeds, with Japan's ADRAS managing to hold station 50m from a 3 tonne piece of junk. Bonus: Hadfield's gentle put-down to Musk's 'hungry hippo' gatecrash.
I earlier mentioned the astonishing visions of Io provided by SHARK-VIS. Earth based observations comparable to those of Juno or Galileo (when not in encounter mode).
Two words to keep in mind when assessing the feasibility of extremely improbable measurements: gravitational waves.
John Viril,
I figured you had a real-life story behind JaRon. Sadly, I'm not shocked... but it still doesn't help with your theory. We SHOULD try to right sound laws, but that won't help if too many of us don't give a f@$k about what we do to the lives of defendants in court.
Two Scoops has access to competent counsel.
-----
Regarding the topic of this post, I've known David Livingstone for years. We overlapped at the Space Frontier Foundation. Very dedicated fellow. Bit of a cynic, but in a community of starry-eyed space advocates we needed him to throw ice water on us occasionally... which he did. On me too. 8)
He's known his purpose in life for a long time... and done exactly that. I encourage folks to give him a listen.
Dr Brin in the main post:
but did I name the main character of Existence after this “Livingston”?)
And yet, the name "Living Stone" was synchronistically a too cute for words name to give the character, considering the object he found in the story.
"How much longer can I go on being an atheist?"
A trivia question for OGH, decades ago Niven & Pournelle wrote Lucifedr's Hammer, did your thesis inform their comet description "Hot fudge sundae, that falls on Tuesdsae"?
LH, your JD Vance comment in the previous thread, I've long thought the right wing was driven by resentment. While I'm not personally on his list of people he's tired of being decent to, I know if those folks get any sort of fairness, I have little to worry about, anyway, NAZIs & NAZI-adjacent types get bored of tormenting the same people and their predecessors showed form for just that, which does not do anything positive for my peace of mind. And if they're so certain those they despise are going to Hell, why bother tormenting them in this life?
Tim H:
I've long thought the right wing was driven by resentment.
I've used the term "grievance", but yes, it's all the same thing. In their minds, the country used to rightfully belong to them and still should. And now that other people are having more of a say in democracy, that means democracy isn't functioning correctly, and any means necessary to correct that are justified.
Vance taps into the sense among Trump voters that they're upset and angry about things not going their way, and that they feel righteously justified to rebel against that. What they completely ignore is how much of a similar sentiment exists on our side of the aisle. As I mentioned last time, they have a "What else do you expect me to do?" attitude when they feel they're being censored in expressing their views about gays or contraception, but they don't grant similar legitimacy to those of us aggrieved at being dictated to by Christian nationalists or gerrymandered Republican legislatures.
Tim H:
And if they're so certain those they despise are going to Hell, why bother tormenting them in this life?
The excuse is that they're attempting to save us from Hell. The reality is that they're sadists who love having an excuse for treating powerless people harshly without consequence to themselves.
Dad joke from The Planetary Society
NASA is launching a mission to say sorry to all the aliens.
They call it Apollo G.
I've long said that the deep trauma underlying MAGA grievance is not loss of power... most MAGAs never had any to lose.
Yes, Mark Twain said if you gave a poor white southerner someone to kick below them, they'd crawl on their knees and die for their plantation lords (later 'class oppressors.') But even that isn't it.
The high school is the center of all life in every small town and the senior class sports and prom and other stars are each year's heroes. And each year they kick off the dust and 2/3 of them head off to universities and cities and IF they come back at all, they come back changed. That's been happening yearly for more than a century. And I won't apologize for a good thing!
But it's gotta hurt.
Happy Father's Day to all for whom the greeting is appropriate.
Dr Brin:
But it's gotta hurt.
No point quibbling over just what the MAGA crowd is aggrieved over. "Now, we're just haggling over the price." My point is that they only recognize their own grievance as legitimate and their own pushback as justified. They refuse to recognize that others have the same sentiment toward their affronts to our sensibilities as they have to their complaints. We're supposed to man up and just take it, but the cry like snowflakes* over the least discomfort.
Limbaugh railed against drug abusers and then it turned out he was one. But that didn't make him sympathetic to the others. His was considered a special case, by his followers and by himself. Current events are littered with examples of that type.
* Cold, white, and enough of them together will shut down public schools.
* * *
Ok, now off with the family. Happy Father's Day again.
"Limbaugh railed against drug abusers and then it turned out he was one. But that didn't make him sympathetic to the others."
Roy Cohn and many other man-f'ers poured persecution on gays.
Dr Brin:
Roy Cohn and many other man-f'ers poured persecution on gays
Well, for one thing, I've heard that men who like to...shall we say penetrate...other men don't consider themselves to be "gay". That's reserved for those on the receiving end.
But in any case, I once saw printed dialogue for some off-Broadway play that had Roy Cohn as a character. It's a fictionalized portrayal, of course, but in the play, when Cohn was said to have contracted AIDs, he responded something like this (from memory):
"I don't have AIDs. AIDs is a homosexual disease, and homosexuals are powerless. I can call up the president and have him take my call. I'm not powerless, therefore I'm not a homosexual. Ipso facto, I don't have AIDs--I have liver disease."
Larry,
"I'm so manly I only sleep with men" was and is a thing. The Roman Emperor Heliogabalus was criticized not because he had male consorts*, but because he was rumored to prefer to...I guess I can use the word 'sub'.
Pappenheimer
*Roman society would have had more trouble with this, if he hadn't been, you know, Emperor. I guess after Tiberius, people had to reset their imperial morality standards.
It took me a few days to get all the way through the J.D. Vance interview I posted about last comments. Here's another bit of Vance's own words. Again, I get that the people he's aligning with are angry that they don't feel heard. But he doesn't get that they're not the only ones. And his side is the one proposing to use the US military to suppress any such "palpable and actionable frustration" from our side.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/13/opinion/jd-vance-interview.html
I think people really, really underrate the sense to which there is palpable and actionable frustration, and I’m always surprised that their assumption appears to be that Trump is the worst, rather than the best, expression of that frustration. Or at least, one of the better in the whole host of possibilities. We’re in this moment where people are really pissed off, and I think for legitimate reasons. And I don’t understand, looking at the country that we have right now, and saying, “The riot on January the 6th was the worst expression of this.”
The beauty of the world, the paragon of animals. And yes, a quintessence of dust.
I think the key is individualism. Mobs and fashion disguise and corrupt everything. Sycophancy is a powerful, contagious, scary affliction. We need to spend some time in isolation, like Asimov said in his 1959 essay. Otherwise we lose our humanity.
That isolation is one of the marvels of space. My favourite parts of FOUNDATION books were the long, lonely journeys across the galaxy.
The high school is the center of all life in every small town and the senior class sports and prom and other stars are each year's heroes. And each year they kick off the dust and 2/3 of them head off to universities and cities and IF they come back at all, they come back changed.
Basically patriarchs whining over loss of their chattels.
I believe there is experimental evidence to suggest that many homophobes 'doth protest too much' to ensure that fingers don't start pointing their way.
scidata:
We need to spend some time in isolation,
COVID helped with that for awhile.
I'm always amazed at the GOP-types that say, "We've got all the guns, let's use them." in response to liberals and progressives.
I've spend my career making weapons of war. My master's thesis was written about creating better materials for nuclear bomb safeties. I've built jet engines and howitzer barrels.
Idiots want to brag about how many pop-guns they have?
I'll see your pop-gun and raise with a titanium mobile howitzer.
(oh, and I have pop-guns, too)
Minorities & liberals have been quietly arming themselves for years, without the arrogant bluster. Far FEWER actual guns than the masturbation-fetishists. But all you got is one trigger finger at a time... except John Wayne.
What we do have is loyalty from the officer corps. But I worry about the noncoms.
Dr. Brin,
"...loyalty from the officer corps. But I worry about the noncoms."
Speaking as a socialist former noncom who has served with some Christofascist officers, that's a pretty broad statement. One Gen. Flynn is more worrisome than several dozen NCOs.
Pappenheimer
I guess in Europe I'd be 'social democratic', but viewed from the far end of the wingosphere, I probably sound Marxist. Socialized medicine! Guaranteed paid leave! The world will collapse!
Pappenheimer
Pappenheimer,
I'll see your Flynn and raise you two Vindman brothers.
Alfred,
Not the issue. There are open-minded, educated, officers; I've met some of them. There are also enough Flynn types ensconced in mid to high level command and staff positions to worry me; they promote and recommend their own, and proselytize wherever they can. Fox News used to be the default channel on military bases; I got tired of that at the gym, because I wanted to keep my heart rate low. I also got tired of not bowing my head at opening prayers.
Pappenheimer
P.S. I recently uncovered an old dog tag of mine. It has my name, my blood type, and that I'm agnostic. Jedi wasn't an option back then
Pappenheimer,
I know. I've seen the propaganda too.
Thing is... the military is divided. USAF less so. USN less so in the other direction. That's why it matters who actually commits the first act of insurrection.
I've been wearing my sweatshirt with the Union Army pattern on it... to work. I get a few looks and not just because I support the USN. They are obviously working out the symbolism... and one civilian actually asked me to explain. Which I did.
We live in interesting times, no?
Yep,
Bin Ladin's master plan is working perfectly, at least on the 'divide and weaken the enemies of Islam' part. The 'recreate the Caliphate' part is having trouble.
(Mostly tongue in cheek, but not all the way.)
Pappenheimer
P.S. firing the first shot - the first shot can be faked very well these days. There were still Germans in the 1960's, at least, who believed Poland had attacked Germany in 1939, and those were clumsier times.
You guys make it sound as if the US armed forces are a powder keg.
Pappenheimer:
Mostly tongue in cheek, but not all the way.
Al Franken called that "kidding on the square." I've run with it ever since.
Tony Fisk,
Sorta yes and no. Many active shooter events occur on military bases. You hear more about the ones at elementary schools, but the bigger risk is for those of us working near the bases.
It's not a huge risk and I don't feel personally endangered, but I take their training class yearly to avoiding tuning out to the risk.
Pappenheimer,
Bin Laden's master plan is working perfectly...
I think we give him WAY too much credit for foresight. We did much the same with the Soviets during the Cold War. I think it rather a shame we didn't keep him alive to prove how human he was.
Yes... we overreacted. We did that with the Japanese too. Anyone who shocks us out of our tuned-out state to make us confront the crude reality that there is a wider world that matters gets this response.
What's happening here nowadays is actually part of a worldwide event. Two Scoops is leveraging it here, but others are leveraging it elsewhere. None of that should be credited to UBL.
I wouldn't credit Putin either because from where I sit this just looks like a consequence of future shock. We are squarely into the 21st century. The future has arrived.
'Master plans', 'arrogant bluster', and cursory dismissal of adversaries' abilities are the usual markers one finds on the scrap heap of history. A modest, patient, and introspective enemy is the only one worth worrying about. Like the Trisolarans perhaps.
We SHOULD try to right sound laws, but that won't help if too many of us don't give a f@$k about what we do to the lives of defendants in court.
Two Scoops has access to competent counsel.
This is true. I have become more left-wing on this issue as I've gotten older and seen the abuse "the system" can impose on disfavored groups.
Our system was created by rebels who were trying to correct the abuses of an authoritative government. However, over time, as the mainstream gets farther and farther from those lessons, and they believe in the fundamental legitimacy of their social authorities, they forget and can develop a blind eye to the flaws in their social order and culture.
However, the problem is that what we do to combat elites with very active defense, can create legal precedents that turn abusive when used against disfavored defendants.
In some ways, the needs of the poor and unpopular limit our ability to restrain the privileged. The biggest tragedy here would be to not do enough to stop an abuser, but to use a half-measure that ends up increasing the harm to the disenfranchised. That way, we get the worst of both worlds.
OTOH, probably the best outcome to which we can aspire, is enough punishment to deter the wealthy, while preventing the worst outcomes for the poor.
John Viril,
I have no issues with your general concern. I'm just doubting it is useful in this case.
I sincerely doubt the folks who wrote the words that allowed for elevation of the misdemeanor regarding false business records imagined it would be used against a former President. THAT fits with your concerns. In this case, though, I think it is EXACTLY what they intended since it is generally the elite who are rich enough to hide difficult to prove felonies behind misdemeanor falsifications of business records.
What you are seeing here isn't abuse of the poor, but the application of a law to a member of the elite. If we want Justice to be blind to social status (I love how we blindfold Justice and others in The West do not), this is a textbook example underway. In fact, it is a better example of that than the federal document handling and Georgia election interference charges.
"Limbaugh railed against drug abusers and then it turned out he was one. But that didn't make him sympathetic to the others."
Roy Cohn and many other man-f'ers poured persecution on gays.
I think it's because people like them don't come across as someone embittered by past injustice such that the end up damaging others due to their emotional scars. instead, they come across as selfish people who will abuse anyone as long as it serves their self-interest, even if the target is like them and could be a victim of social abuse.
I've been kicking around ideas that seem somewhat related in, perhaps, a tangential way that isn't obviously connected.
I recently starting binge re-watching Battlestar Galactica (the early 2000's reboot). It really holds up rather well, because Ronald D. Moore's storytelling is strong. He was inspired by a lot of post 9/11 issues. But, instead of coming across as dated, it actually reminds you of why those thing were an issue.
In short, good fiction makes the past come alive instead of seeming dated.
So, the question is how does it do that? Seems to me, the answer is lies in its ability to "give the devil his due" and at least help you understand why the villains do what they do. Thus, they don't come across as purely situational bullies, but as people that can, at some level, be understood.
Hence we get fiction like "The Acolyte" and other Disney properties that are running some seriously-expensive IPs into the ground.
While BSG and Star Wars are both space opera instead of hard sci-fi, BSG is higher-grade fiction in that it makes you think about the recent past more than the "cheerleader effect" for the "good guys" that made Star Wars so popular back in the day.
For example, I'm watching an episode where the Colonials catch a Cylon sleeper agent who teases that there's a nuke somewhere in the fleet. Hence, the colonials resort to torture in the interrogation.
We can recognize the quality storytelling of Ronald D. Moore in that it doesn't feel dated. Instead, it makes that recent past come alive as something debatable, even though the early returns suggests history will judge Bush's policy very harshly. Part of how Moore pulls it off is by mixing up the traits of the parties so it's not a perfect allegory.
To wit, the "evil Cylons" are monotheists, while the Colonials we're supposed to identify with believe in a pagan-like pantheon. This twist separates us from the perfect allegory, which then requires a bit of thought to deal with the contradictory strands.
Notice that, despite the progressive bent of the themes, Moore's BSG didn't create the kind of right-wing hate that Disney Star Wars does. Moore's use of sci-fi scenery abstracts us from known answers to make us look at questions that still seem applicable years later.
OTOH, uses a lot of "representation" and "social justice" themes in place of actual good storytelling. And, when fans don't fall overthemselves with praise of the "social message," they then attack the audience as bigots.
For one thing, that's bloody stupid marketing. Second, it seems like Disney is going out of its way to kick the OG fans of their hugely-expensive IPs and then excusing bad storytelling by vilifying their critics.
Well, notice how a lot of the same fans crowded theaters to watch movies with "woke" themes such as "Black Panther" and "Barbie." If those films could pack in an audience, why are these properties continually failing? Yes, bigots exist. But notice how they can't derail good stories.
Disney is blaming their audience when they should be looking at the poorly-crafted stories that they're trying to sell.
P.S.
The kind of hard sci-fi most of us here admire (and the kind our host has produced) is extrapolating current science to ask questions we might face in the future.
That kind of hard-to-create fiction can see quickly dated as knowledge advances, but if it's well-done can still ask interesting questions (and thus be entertaining well into the future).
Apparently Voyager 1 is fully functional again (all four instruments). Google "nasa voyager 1 back" for stories. Relocating code and bypassing a bad chip at almost 1 light day distance would be a marvel of space indeed.
Alfred Differ:
What you are seeing here isn't abuse of the poor, but the application of a law to a member of the elite
It seems to be a variation on the people who say they don't like either party increasing deficits, but only complain about it during Democratic administrations. Those who complain about laws which unfairly convict poor defendants, but only mention it when the law is actually applied for a change to a powerful white defendant.
JV re “So, the question is how does it do that? Seems to me, the answer is lies in its ability to "give the devil his due" and at least help you understand why the villains do what they do. Thus, they don't come across as purely situational bullies, but as people that can, at some level, be understood.”
I think you have it! A good story comes from the character. If the structure of the movie comes from the character it will be authentic to itself and resonate with the audience.
Stories fail when objects predicate the subject and the story is about things happening to the character.
Bad story telling reminds me of my sister’s pet hamsters in the late 70s The Hamster is the star. You bring in the star. Habitrail company sells the habitats with all these cool, adventurous attachments. The more attachments you buy, the more fun the hamster has. Wrong! The hamster makes a nest, gets depressed sleeps and shits. No matter how many attachments you add to it, the hamster is still boring and your sister keeps buying more plastic shit to surround it with until it dies.
The entertaining hamster story is about the adventures of the hamster who wants to escape and keeps trying to chew its way out of the Habitrail prison until finally it gets eaten by the cat.
Now. Thinking of theme, contrast the pre-911, Starship Troopers movie (1997) with the the 2002 Jeep Liberty Commercial featuring Enrique Iglesias singing "Hero" as the car drives up lady liberty. Look it up on YouTube if you have the stomach.
As soon as Hamilton became THE thing, you could watch all the cars in the industry hitching up to the train. I’m aware but unbothered that All Creatures Great and Small re-cultures their Yorkshire setting as it doesn’t affect the story. I totally dig “The Great.” But I wonder how something as not safe for 2024 as Mel Brooks “History or the World, part II” can feel closer in humanist spirit and integrity to Hamilton, than Bridgerton or Foundation which feel like the Jeep Liberty commercial. Just cars hitched up to the gravy rain.
And my walkout list is pretty short: Battle Field Earth. The Cell with Jennifer Lopez. John Carter. Villeneuve’s Dune, Foundation Season 2. Hobbit 2012.
"my walkout list is pretty short:..."
Clearly you have never seen Smokey and the Bandit Part 2. Or taken a five-year old to Saving Private Ryan. (please note that I approve vehemently of not erasing the horror of the battlefield, but the first scenes of the latter movie were nightmare-inducing for me, let alone a kid - I wonder if they triggered actual combat vets.)
Pappenheimer
P.S. - wiki says enough vets were affected to cause a spike in PTSD hotline calls
Larry,
Well... how many poor defendants do you imagine are out there falsifying business records to cover up felonies? 8)
I suspect these crimes were added to the NY books to deal with organized crime or with real estate shenanigans. I doubt they had a former President in mind... who has probably done both. Instead they got him trying to cover up election fraud.
I gotta wonder how many other crime bosses thought it would have been a good idea to get elected President. Takes a special kinda stupid I suspect.
Worth aspiring to:
https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2024/06/rethinking-democracy-for-the-age-of-ai.html
In short, how we might use some of the tools "The usual suspects" use against Democracy to reinforce it. Tip of the hat to "whitroth" for the link.
Pappenheimer: taken a five-year old to Saving Private Ryan
I took my five-year old to seen Mulan (1998). He was so scared that we spent most of the movie in the lobby. The sound system overwhelmed him, the Mongolians didn't help.
Pappenheimer:
Or taken a five-year old to Saving Private Ryan.
When my brother had a 2 year old daughter, I sent them a video of the 1960s "Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer" claymation show from our youth. See, I was nine years old when I first saw that one. It never occurred to me how actually terrifying the Abominable Snow Monster would be to a two year old.
John Viril:
Second, it seems like Disney is going out of its way to kick the OG fans of their hugely-expensive IPs
I'm not aware of all of the series you are talking about here, but one of them must be Star Wars. In that case, I'd say that most of the pre-Disney prequels/sequels already did that job. After Empire Strikes Back, all they offered were repeat storylines, bad acting, and clumsy set-ups that never satisfy (What was "There's something familiar about this place." or "I have the feeling I'll never see her again" all about?)
I maintain it was an impossible task for anyone to continue the series and make it satisfying to fans of the original. What Disney did at least was to climb from the dark and depressing mood of the prequels and make them fun in the way that the Marvel movies were.
Well, notice how a lot of the same fans crowded theaters to watch movies with "woke" themes such as "Black Panther" and "Barbie."
Black Panther was a Disney one.
https://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2024/Pres/Maps/Jun19.html
Today is Juneteenth. In honor of the occasion, we share this quote from an 1857 speech by Frederick Douglass: "If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning."
And this from an 1859 letter written by Abraham Lincoln: "Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves, and, under a just God, cannot long retain it."
And finally, this from an 1866 address by abolitionist and proto-feminist Frances Ellen Watkins Harper: "We are all bound up together in one great bundle of humanity, and society cannot trample on the weakest and feeblest of its members without receiving a curse in its own soul."
Perhaps readers will find one or more of these observations relevant to the year 2024.
...I wonder if they triggered actual combat vets.
Tom Hanks said the experience of the first day of filming was horrifying.
What Disney did at least was to climb from the dark and depressing mood of the prequels ...
I did try tweaking 'Revenge', but Abrams salted the earth with the latter trilogy.
I dubbed the second 'The Last Straw' and didn't bother with the final one.
Tony Fisk:
I did try tweaking 'Revenge', but Abrams salted the earth with the latter trilogy.
I dubbed the second 'The Last Straw' and didn't bother with the final one.
The recent film I actually enjoyed was the one-off called Rogue One. The casting of dead actors was a bit unnerving, but that aside, it covered the time period (immediately prior to the original film) that I once thought the prequels would end with.
Y'all enjoy yourselves. I'm taking the week off and heading for San Diego. My son wants to see some place named after legos. 8)
"Apparently Voyager 1 is fully functional again (all four instruments). Google "nasa voyager 1 back" for stories. Relocating code and bypassing a bad chip at almost 1 light day distance would be a marvel of space indeed."
The fact that thery set up those options, in 70 with 70 tech, is beyond ... well it's all beyond!
Alfred you know how to email me your San Diego plans?
The transistor, the computer, and artificial intelligence sprang out of early quantum and nuclear research (largely in New Jersey and New Mexico). More importantly, computational psychology was hatched there too.
We came within a hair's breadth of achieving Asimov's positronic future, but were scuppered by corporate and entrepreneurial fixation on the entertainment potential of computers. AMC's "Halt and Catch Fire" was a great review of this catastrophe.
Voyager era tech makes me proud yet sad.
The recent film I actually enjoyed was the one-off called Rogue One. The casting of dead actors was a bit unnerving, but that aside, it covered the time period (immediately prior to the original film) that I once thought the prequels would end with.
Well, Rogue One isn't exactly a one-off. Yes, it's a one-off movie but the Disney Star War series Andor tells the backstory of the male lead from Rogue One.
Andor is terrific. High-quality story-telling and diverges from "heroic" Star Wars stories in that it focuses on the sort of "shades of gray" things the rebellion had to do so that Luke Skywalker got to sit in an X-wing with the shot at taking out the Death Star.
Other than Andor and Rogue One, most of Disney Star Wars has ranged from disappointing to outright garbage.
And, yes, I was well aware Disney made "Black Panther." But the irony is them conintuing to blame audiences as racists and sexist when they themselves have made a woke title like Black Panther, enjoyed success, and still seem to think a lot of the same people are such raving racists/sexists they cause their Star Wars movies to bomb.
Uhh....it's a pathetic excuse from a bad storyteller. Sure there are racist/sexists and an ENTIRE right-wing Youtube subculture that makes bank off of decrying anything "woke." But, a good story will draw an audience despite such attacks, as Black Panther demonstrates.
But, hey, if you can get one more gig with a $15 million or so paycheck as a showrunner or movie producer who made a dog, those excuses make a lot of sense. Maybe a studio head or network will buy it and hire you again.
I'll note that both Barbie and Black Panther were *huge* hits, both commercially and critically.
It's not surprising to see studios try to replicate them. Studios do not want surprise hits, they want reliable returns.
I'll not be surprised if some studio tries to sell Oppenheimer Pt.2- The Return of Ross Lomanitz.
(Dr. Lomanitz was my freshman physics prof, so I am anxiously awaiting the call from the studios looking for help with the script.)
Or maybe a bio-pic of Richard Feynman? (Did everyone notice him in Oppenheimer, during the first nuclear bomb test? :) )
Those who complain about laws which unfairly convict poor defendants, but only mention it when the law is actually applied for a change to a powerful white defendant.
Well, I will point out that often cases involving powerful defendants (not just white) will draw far more media attention than some poor, disadvantaged nobody.
Thus, those cases will have more cultural currency and draw more public analysis.
For one thing, those powerful defendants can force more frequent appeals, which then give rise to more reported decisions, which become binding precedents within their jurisdiction (appellate cases).
So if people are talking about a case, you can persuade a lot of people to pay attention to legal problems---and perhaps solve them.
Who is going to draw more public sympathy? A black fringe gang member accused of murder, or a white Marine recruit who gets pressured by police to confess to a crime because the cop assures him he will get a better outcome?
Yet, if you win an entrapment verdict in case 2, you set a precedent and gain public awareness that can help case 1 (which occurs largely outside public view).
John Oliver has a bit up on Project 2025. I did not know that it advocates dismantling NOAA because of it is 'one of the main drivers of the climate change alarm industry.'
Yeah. "We don't like what's ahead of us, so let's just paint the cockpit windows black and turn off the weather radar."
Pappenheimer
Well...
I came across an old Salon article written by our gracious host in 1999 critiquing the underlying themes from Star Wars.
Dr. Brin had a great reply to George Lucas saying that "benevolent despots" get things done. Basically, doesn't happen. Despots create stagnation.
Totally correct. Western Culture were backwater barbarians compared to highly civilized China until the enlightenment happened and educational institutions developed the technique of accumulating knowlege through published papers and research combined with commercial patent law.
Only then did the west create such a knowledge advantage that they could dominate far older civilizations under the weight of accumulated knowledge.
Compare the theory behind Western medicine and the Empirical Traditional Chinese medicine and one can see why. Traditional Chinese medicine has shown to be surprisingly effective in many circumstances, but the underlying theory behind it simply doesn't work to build out future solutions to medical problems. Traditional Chinese medicine provides Empirical solutions to set piece problems, but doesn't build upon itself to solve even more difficult problems.
Western medicine, with its constantly updated scientific theories, achieves this feat.
Consider that the venerated Chinese culture didn't have educational institutions that could compete with the western university system. One fun fact that brought this home is the oldest university in Asia is Santa Tomas University in Manila (which, btw, happens to be where my Dad went to Medical School) founded in 1611 by colonial spanish missionaries.
BTW, another fun fact is Santa Tomas University in the Philippines is actually older than Harvard University. Betcha you could win some bar bets with that one!
While I'm no expert on the history of Universities, I do recall that the earliest such institution was in Egypt. Possibly due to Grecian influence at the time, but not entirely 'Western'.
Whilst I'm on about influences, here's an interesting interview between retiring ABC radio host Phillip Adams and George Monbiot on the origins of Neo-Liberalism.
Neo-what? Yes, well... that's part of the story.
John Viril:
Uhh....it's a pathetic excuse from a bad storyteller. Sure there are racist/sexists and an ENTIRE right-wing Youtube subculture that makes bank off of decrying anything "woke." But, a good story will draw an audience despite such attacks, as Black Panther demonstrates.
I'm not arguing that blaming the audience is a good strategy. I'm taking your word about the excuses, because I haven't been paying attention to entertainment news, but I have no reason to doubt you.
However, what I am saying is that there is no way to stay faithful to the prequels and have good storytelling. There's a kind of Heisenberg uncertainty that makes it impossible to do both. I'd think that Disney disappointed their target audience not because a female lead was "woke", but because the audience who still supports the franchise after the prequels likes bad acting and idiot plots.
A.F. Rey:
Did everyone notice him [Feynman] in Oppenheimer, during the first nuclear bomb test? :)
Yes, if only because my daughter was a big fan of his books a while back.
Haven't seen Oppenheimer yet, but I do recall Feynman mentioned in the book "The Manhattan Project", described as a persistent gadfly to Bethe's(?) solid swatting (Feynman would have been fairly junior at the time, and I don't recall the reference as being unkind: more a description of style rather than ability.). Also (if memory serves) thought he wouldn't need glasses at Trinity because 'nothing could be *that* bright. He found out...
While I'm no expert on the history of Universities, I do recall that the earliest such institution was in Egypt. Possibly due to Grecian influence at the time, but not entirely 'Western'.
The school you're talking about is Al-Azhar University, that didn't call itself a university until 1961.
However, it was founded in 987 AD as a Madrasa school.
An even older learning institution is in Morocco...which dates back to 895 AD or CE if you prefer.
However, it was Western schools that developed the concept of scientific inquiry and accumulation of shared knowledge that builds upon itself.
Early Madrasa schools ONLY included instruction in religious study...but later came to involve secular subjects. I wouldn't consider a Madrasa that only teaches religion to be a university, no matter how early their founding.
Tony,
If this university was in Alexandria (would bet good money on that) it was established by a Greek-speaking Macedonian king in a city founded by a Greek-speaking Macedonian would-be Emperor of the World*, and Alexandria was considered the premier Greek city in its heyday. Local influences, sure, but solidly 'Western'.
*Though Al had barely enough time to scratch out the city plans on bare dirt before running off to conquer someone new. Man had the attention span of a six-year old; probably why he never planned for what would happen to his empire after his death.
Pappenheimer
Woops - Was thinking of the Temple of the Muses, aka the Library. reading J V, will do a bit of google...
Pappenheimer
Apparently not called a university, but definitely a research institute.
Pappenheimer
A prediction: climate will be a top issue in Nov. And scrapping NOAA will be a bigly loser.
We already cancelled our Caribbean cruise (non-weather related).
Climate chaos? While the rest of the country was sweltering, the Missoula airport yesterday was deicing planes and people were skiing a foot of new snow in the mountains.
Don Gisselbeck said...
Climate chaos?
Um you just described chaos.
Sigh. Biden is in trouble according to Nate Silver.
Yes. The plus side is the snow/ice patch on Siyeh Pass should still be skiable in August even with its new 50 meter ice caves.
Nate Silver ain't a god. Many mention one reason - that media companies want a tight race. But I hear no one mention the biggest reason I believe Biden is polling even with Tanning Bedminster. ALL of you know flakey lefties who deem it uncool to avow loyalty to an authority figure in an establishment.
The same flakes have driven hispanic males out of the coalition through linguistic bullying. No native Spanish speaker wants to be told he must go gender free. It is uitter Anglo-chauvinism as bad as anything done by conquering redcoats.
Nate Silver isn't a God, but he is good at what he does. For example, he did give Trump better winning odds than almost anyone else in 2016. His rationale made sense too.
Silver argued that Trump needed multiple states that were statistical coinflips to break for him, and gave him a 25% chance to win. That's a lot more than anyone else. I remember on the morning of election day, big outlets were giving Trump a one or two percent chance and were all but crowning Hillary.
Came out later that Trump's campaign did a better job targeting resources to places Hillary considered solid blue. Jared Kushner got credit for spearheading that modelling, but that just sounds rather convenient for the Trump family.
I've been familiar with Silver for years going back to when he wrote a lot about baseball analytics.
I wouldn't say a Biden loss is inevitable or anything like that. But I am curious about his modelling and what his analysis is telling him.
My uninspired POOMA forecast still has rumpt's chances at about 30-35%, but enough rodent seduction could pull him through. I do agree that his chances are way higher than they would be in a sane country.
Pappenheimer
P.S. At first thought this was an Onion article, but a Michigan GQP state representative has been arrested for allegedly firing a handgun "towards" a stripper, who called the cops and ran. This guy's father, a German immigrant, became a Bircher and a state senator in the 70's, touting his service in WWII but not disclosing it had been in the Luftwaffe.
Biden wins the coin toss and chooses position (same as in '20). That should make the it look like a continuation of the last debates, where Biden prevailed decisively. I'm sure DT will insist it was a rigged toss. Let's hope it was.
On the peering back through time theme, a Bronze Age shipwreck has been found in deep Med water. This indicates advanced navigation (out of sight of shore). Appears intact, let's hope for nav instrumentation.
https://cosmiclog.com/2024/06/20/3300-year-old-shipwreck-wows-israeli-archaeologists/
I've come to view all of the opinion polling on Trump vs Biden to be nothing but media circus. Much of the continuous stream of polls are simply media sources making news rather than reporting it. They feed political pundits and news outlets who stick to a doom and gloom narrative to the point of denying evidence to the contrary, because that's what gets them views. I do think that Nate Silver is better than many, more honest than typical. But . . .
What gives the game away to me is how out of touch the endless opinion polls have been compared to exit polling during the primaries. Exit polls are by far the most accurate, which makes sense since they ask people who they did in fact actually vote for, instead of asking a series of questions to try and predict who people are likely to vote for in the future. And what makes all those opinion polls look even worse than the exit polls do is the actual results of the primaries.
Compared to actual results Nate Silver did better than most, but he still did abysmally poor. FiveThirtyEight's final averages for Trump for every primary, but one, to date have been significantly off of actual results. Off by 10 points on the low side and 34 points on the high side.
No, these polls are nothing but a distraction, at best. Better to simply ignore them, and certainly don't assume they accurately reflect reality.
But, if you are going to look at the polls, take a good look. Don't just read the headline articles. Collectively, polling over the past several months has shown a trend of Biden slowly improving against Trump. But the typical media, I'm looking at you NYT, isn't likely to tell you that. At least not in a headline article. No, they are going to use a poll that supports the narrative they have decided to feed the public. Even if that poll has already been thoroughly discredited by experts.
scidata said...
"On the peering back through time theme, a Bronze Age shipwreck has been found in deep Med water. This indicates advanced navigation (out of sight of shore). Appears intact, let's hope for nav instrumentation.
https://cosmiclog.com/2024/06/20/3300-year-old-shipwreck-wows-israeli-archaeologists/"
Or possibly the got caught in a storm and blown way off course, to their doom.
Fascinating find, thanks for the link. It brings to mind one of my greatest regrets. In college I minored in ancient Greek history with a focus on Alexander III. One semester my professor asked me to join an expedition taking place the next summer to recover an ancient ship, possibly a trireme, recently discovered in shallow coastal waters. Can't remember exactly where it was. Most of the expenses would have been covered, but I would have had to come up with some modest amount of money. Can't remember how much, certainly no more than $2K. But, being a poor college student I decided I shouldn't do it. What a fucking moron. I wish I could go back and smack some sense into that stupid punk I was.
I did end up getting to help some, though. The reason he asked me in the first place was because I was an engineering student. One of the things he was hoping to clarify with this find was the feasibility of certain accounts of certain events during Alexander's campaigns that involved portaging ships. He came back with physical dimensions and mass estimates of a ship of a type in Alexander's navy and I set up some simple physics problems that indicated the portaging accounts were very feasible, even allowing for large error bars everywhere.
My other great regret was, again as a poor college student, with $3,800 to spend, deciding on a 1980 Mazda 626 instead of a cherry 1969 Cougar with a nicely built 351, 9" rear end and 4 speed wide ratio top-loader tranny. My wife still hasn't forgiven me for that, and I hadn't even met her yet.
Darrell E I wish I could go back and smack some sense into that stupid punk I was
Yyyyep.
On the plus side for me, I did buy a 6.6 litre (400 cubic in) TransAm and got that out of my blood before marriage, so as The Who said, "I don't need to be forgiven."
A Bronze Age cargo vessel could possibly venture away from land, and the article notes that it had a load of amphorae. A triere or other galley would only do that as a desperation move - in a fully manned ancient galley, the weight of the men could outweigh the galley itself, with no way to store enough drinking water for a long voyage without replenishment.
Pappenheimer
Darrell E and then others:
I wish I could go back and smack some sense into that stupid punk I was.
My youthful regrets are all about the girls who may have gone out with me at least once had I only had the nerve to ask and the wherewithal to know of a good date setting for teenagers. As a skinny nerd long before nerds were trendy, I anticipated failure rather than daring to make the attempt.
Like all of the other drooling boys in the neighborhood, I looked admiringly on Stacey, the absolutely gorgeous babe who babysat many neighborhood kids all summer long. Never dreamed of actually approaching her romantically, because I thought she was 21 or older when I was 16. Turned out later that she's was a year younger than I am.
Girls grow up much faster. 😏
Time for me to limp back home. Set a record on My watch for movement calories and my joints are making sure I don’t try again today.
San Diego area is more humid than I expected. The hillsides say they get more water here than my part of the CA coast.
I would LOVE to knock some confidence into my younger self. As someone who was actively ridiculed by girls as a tween and early teen, I simply didn't believe it when girls were strongly attracted to me (which happened more frequently than I realized after getting rid of my buck teeth, braces, thick glasses, shrill high pitched voice, and scrawny frame---i was the smallest kid in my class every year from 1st to 9th grade).
Then, when I went from 125 lbs as a college freshman to 175 my junior year, well I missed A LOT of girls who liked me.
One I totally kick myself over was a girl from California named Nusa, a curly blond with an absolutely smashing figure. Or the just graduated French Canadian Dr. From McGill's 6 yr med program whom I met on the beach in Malaga when I was 20.
Not only was she a total smoke show (with the brains to have an MD at 24), she had a slight French accent to her English. Should have followed up like crazy despite all the pre-cheap long distance logistical problems of that time.
Larry,
I was a complete wallflower in HS, but achieved a partial breakthrough in college allowing me to actually ask women out on dates* - in fact, a fellow SCA member complained to someone else, and was quoted to me as saying I was "...only interested in women and dice."
Which makes me sound like my younger self should have been on a riverboat somewhere.
Pappenheimer
*actual official count is one date asked, but the SCA provided a social milieu that reduced the need for structured dating
P.S. Heinlein's Glory Road has some choice words for people like me who will spend their declining days mulling over roads not taken and "girls not tumbled".
"On the peering back through time theme, a Bronze Age shipwreck has been found in deep Med water. This indicates advanced navigation (out of sight of shore). Appears intact, let's hope for nav instrumentation.
https://cosmiclog.com/2024/06/20/3300-year-old-shipwreck-wows-israeli-archaeologists/"
"Or possibly the got caught in a storm and blown way off course, to their doom."
Jonah, that you?
Just realized that in the original AD&D game, any gnome could get a walk-on job as a ship's navigator. They innately knew which way was north. Not sure how this could be handwaved - did gnomes evolve from migratory burrowing animals?
John,
I panicked a bit when I realized I couldn't come up with the name of a beautiful high school girl who, if I had had a brain back then, clearly showed interest in me. My brothers were quite aware at the time and ribbed me about it when we met up last year. Blonde, brilliant and built - graduated and went to Magill; Canadian-Ukrainian. It took me a few minutes of NOT thinking about her to come up with the name. Ah, Raisa...
Pappenheimer
Pappenheimer:
I was a complete wallflower in HS, but achieved a partial breakthrough in college allowing me to actually ask women out on dates
I asked a grand total of one girl out in high school, and she wasn't even from my school. We met on vacation. And that was an unprecedented triumph at the time.
The thing is, I was so timid at the time that, looking objectively back, I had nothing to offer a girl. Around my junior year of HS, I became more comfortable in my own skin and was finally able to converse with girls in a friendly way, but I still never dared ask them out. Maybe I learned too well from Marvel Comics that pining for an unrequited love is the way life goes.
Maybe I also gave off neediness vibes. I've heard it joked that lesbians pick out drapes on a second date, but I wasn't much different from that. A friendly smile or a touch on the arm would have me fantasizing about happily ever afters.
John Viril:
Then, when I went from 125 lbs as a college freshman to 175 my junior year, well I missed A LOT of girls who liked me.
Yes, around age 30 I began noticing that some women actually did like me "in that way". It was a novel experience that I wasn't ready to handle. I actually had to turn one down who was too into me though I was not interested. That had never happened before.
The woman I dated before my wife broke things off unexpectedly (on Independence Day , no less), and again I was not ready for that. I was a wreck for about two years. The Don Henley lyric, "It's been over two years for me, and I'm still not quite myself." really hits home from that era. Then, I finally became comfortable with my single self again, and must have projected newfound confidence, because my wife came along and the rest is history.
While I'm glad and thankful that I was single and childless when my wife and I met, I can't help fruitlessly wishing that the road to that point had had a few more scenic stopovers. But the moving hand and all that...
Pappenheimer:
a beautiful high school girl who, if I had had a brain back then, clearly showed interest in me
If I only had a brain and the nerve.
Never lacked the heart, though.
I was a 'skinny nerd' and/or 'complete wallflower' back in HS
And, whoop, there it is...
Proof positive that what our fine host calls the 'War on Smart People' amounts to little more than sour grapes & resentment as yesteryear's nerdish outcasts try to explain & rationalize away their inherent unlikeability as an envy-based rejection of intellect.
This is a coping mechanism par excellence which allows the socially awkward to project their own failings onto others.
Yeah, that's the ticket!
It's my big juicy brain that others don't like, rather than my sense of entitlement, my arrogance, my inappropriateness & my lack of social skills.
It's a War on Smart People.
I used to lie to myself this way, too.
Best
Sierra Leonian fishermen regularly sail out of sight of land in small lanteen rigged dugout canoes. If you have a rough idea of time of day it's not hard to navigate by sun position.
Gotta agree with Don here - unlikely to find navigation instruments. The Med was sailed on for thousands of years before compasses and sextants - I think the very well-traveled route from Carthage to Syracuse takes one out of sight of land - 140 km of open sea, by Google. If your ancestors having been sailing the same route for generations, you know what to look for. I suspect the wrecked ship was probably off course when she went down. Looking at a map of Israel, you can reach Cyprus or Egypt just about as easily by following the coast.
Of course, there is the apocryphal(?) story of the Turkish admiral who was ordered to take his fleet to Malta (between Sicily and North Africa), and returned days later to report "Malta yok." According to Avram Davidson, this means "Malta isn't there." Whether that means "I couldn't find it" or "I didn't want to go there" is unclear, but this is apparently an old Turkish saying.
Pappenheimer
You can only get to Serendip (Ceylon) by accident.
- a Western corruption of ancient maritime wisdom
Of course the probability of nav instruments is very low. On the order of finding a first century astronomical analog computer amongst the amphorae. We need to look with an open, though skeptical, mindset.
Scidata,
The Polynesian navigators who crossed pretty much the entire Pacific in open boats most likely used, IIRC, star charts made of netting, and took advantage of the very predictable trade winds at certain latitudes. (Explorers would set out against the wind, knowing that if they found only open ocean rather than islands, they could turn west and be assured of full sails home.) This kind of thing is why Madagascar was settled from Indonesia rather than nearby Africa* by people using the Monsoon winds.
Pappenheimer
*wiki informs me there is evidence of earlier habitation, but not much data
evidence of earlier habitation
Pardon me for being very sceptical
Humans - when they expand into an area with no people - expand very fast and make major changes to their environment
Animals and birds that have not been exposed to human predation are easy prey - so become a large easily harvested food source - which enables a very very rapid increase in population.
Duncan,
I have the same issue with the isolated evidence for very early human habitation in the Americas - no known concurrent species extinctions.
Or perhaps there was a hominid subspecies that bred very slowly and never gave up their hunter/gatherer lifestyle, relying instead on stealth and longevity. And pointy ears.
Pappenheimer
Men whowere a bit slow to date and a bit shy, who went on to have happy marriages, have no reason to to anything but smirk and sigh and shake their heads, when lectured about manliness by a weenie coward who failed at every interaction involving human love.
Polynesians famously could read the tides and stars with uncanny briliance. Alas, that great Disney film MOANA does underplay what a lot of them did WITH those voyaging skills.... males heading off to kill all the males on some other island and take everything.
Tony Fisk,
I recently read a nice little summary of Neoliberalism, if you're interested.
The Hidden History of Neoliberalism: How Reaganism Gutted America and How to Restore Its Greatness by Thom Hartmann
This book explains what Neoliberalism is, and how it came to dominate America, and how it has been jacking up America (and other countries) since Reagan. It also shows that both major parties embrace Neoliberalism, it’s just that Republicans want to do it to the hilt, “shock doctrine” style, while more moderate Democrats have toned it down, so America hasn’t ended up like Russia or Pinochet’s Chile - yet.
Paul SB
Dr. Brin,
Polynesian history is as brutal as nearly anyone else's. I shudder at what Disney did to Dark Age England (Sword in the Stone) and early 20th C Russia (Anastasia), particularly the latter - the Czar wasn't overthrown because he incompetently ruled a savagely autocratic country, but because of some curse, I guess?
Kamehameha's conquest of the other Hawaiian islands stands out because he wasn't just raiding, he was building a kingdom. I'd also note that he relied heavily on Western armaments and learned how to make gunpowder - the ingredients are pretty common on volcanic Pacific islands. Once in power, though, he did try to institute the 'Law of the Splintered Paddle' which excepted civilians from military violence. The law refers to an early incident where Kamehameha himself attacked a fisherman busy at his trade, who nearly brained the would-be King in self-defense, but spared his life.
Pappenheimer
P.S. I'd say the GQP has gone beyond Neoliberalism. They want a full Putin-style corporate fascism. I don't think a neoliberal would retaliate against Disney, for instance, for being 'woke.'
Thanks, Lena.
I haven't got hold of Monbiot's book yet but, in the interview I referred to above, he puts Neo-Liberalism's beginnings back to Austria in the fifties. Hayek and others were seeking to ward off a repeat of the excesses of 'collectivism' that Mussolini, Hitler, and Stalin represented. Understandable at the time. Unfortunately, they didn't stop to consider what an extreme in the other direction might result in. Oligarchs kept tabs on Hayek's theories, but they didn't get a chance to start putting them into practice until Thatcher and Reagan (and, in Australia, John Howard).
In 'Doughnut Economics' Raworth sources the rot even further back: to the 1700s, and Adam Smith's first attempts to model the human behaviours that drive economics. Unfortunately, the initial modelling Smith chose for 'Homo Economicus' was based on the behaviours he observed in his own circle: solitary, selfish, insatiable, all-knowing. That part's understandable for a first iteration. What is unforgivable is how the observed deviations from the modelling were later handled by people like John Stuart Mills: by *doubling down* on their definitions, and forcing economics to operate as predicted rather than vice versa (erm... that isn't how science operates!). This led to the exclusion of people whose behaviours didn't match. Homo Economicus grew into a caricature of... economists rather than Humanity as a whole. Thus we end up with a situation described with some hyperbole by Monbiot as:
"A society of philanthropists, governed by psychopaths"
(Monbiot is mainly concerned with the parlous state of British politics, but you can probably see what he's driving at.)
... Sorry, I meant 'thanks, Paul SB'
I think those of us with 20 to 30 generations of ancestors living on solid land underestimate what our sea cousins know.
------
It is worth noting that Ilha Formosa was connected to the mainland until the last big ice melt and people have been living there at least 20K to 30K ya. [I suspect they were there earlier, but rising sea level hid the evidence.] That's a LOT of generations of ancestors who had to figure out how to live on the sea. A significant human genetic line radiates from that island to fill the archipelago that is the east coast of Asia, so figure it out they did.
------
Also... the stars are not that hard to memorize.
Big bunch of nonsense.
The oligarchs never put Hayek's ideas into practice. They bastardized them into self-serving policies and pushed those into practice.
Ask anyone who has ACTUALLY read Hayek.
Ooh, capitals!
Check out the Mont Pelerin Society, Alfred, of which Hayek was president from its founding in 1947, until 1961.
It may be that Hayek's ideas were subsequently bastardised to suit.
(Just as economic models were twisted into pictures to match the increasingly rationalised humunculous that Smith began with). Nevertheless, it was Hayek's ideas oligarchs chose to bastardise.
That is how neo-liberalism started, and what it is today.
Paul SB:
The Hidden History of Neoliberalism: How Reaganism Gutted America and How to Restore Its Greatness by Thom Hartmann
Thom Hartmann has a body of non-fiction that you could spend the rest of your life reading and still not finish. He also has a radio show on WCPT in Chicago, though liberal talk radio is hard to come by elsewhere. Along with the inevitable politics, he also does segments on "geeky science" and the like. He's the only host on WCPT that I regularly listen to who isn't a comedian like Stephanie Miller or Hal Sparks.
Pappenheimer:
I'd say the GQP has gone beyond Neoliberalism. They want a full Putin-style corporate fascism. I don't think a neoliberal would retaliate against Disney, for instance, for being 'woke.'
That's the coup that Trump and the MAGAts pulled. Old style Republicans used culture war issues to acquire votes, but the issues they actually cared about were economic. Paul Ryan and his ilk appear kind of dazed and confused at what their party has morphed into.
They'll still vote Republican, though, because like the authorities in the 1930s, they're so fixated on opposing "socialism" that they can't perceive any other threat to the society that has been good to them,
Paul SB:
I shudder at what Disney did to Dark Age England (Sword in the Stone) and early 20th C Russia (Anastasia),
It helps to approach Disney kids' films as fairy tales that happen "Once upon a time" rather than as teaching materials about the particular times and settings they claim to take place. I know that when I was a kid watching Cinderella or Sleeping Beauty or Snow White, it never even occurred to me to try to place them in a particular historical setting. I didn't even get that Pinocchio was Italian. :)
Larry Hart: dazed and confused at what their party has morphed into
It's the age-old hubris of "Do you still think you can control him/them?"
What you think, you become.
What you feel, you attract.
What you imagine, you create.
- Buddha
Or in simple Disney terms: Be careful what you wish for.
@scidata,
Kurt Vonnegut's first paragraph in the introduction to Mother Night. Emphasis mine:
This is he only story of mine whose moral I know. I don't think it's a marvelous moral; I just happen to know what it is: We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about what we pretend to be.
Stonekettle on Threads makes a point:
https://www.threads.net/@stonekettle
They [MAGAts] think he's [Trump] a genius, and the more they don't understand what he's saying the more intelligent they think he is because MOST intelligent comments go over their heads normally
Larry,
Re: the 30's, I've see references to the term 'premature anti-fascist'. Id est, someone who opposed Hitler and his ilk before it was cool - and therefore someone for the authorities to mistrust.
Pappenheimer
Pappenheimer:
someone who opposed Hitler and his ilk before it was cool - and therefore someone for the authorities to mistrust.
And what goes around comes around. These days, the Republicans apparently mistrust anyone who still opposes Hitler now that doing so is so twencen.
Back when the earth was still cooling in 2016, every single Republican on the primary debate stage claimed that (if it were possible) he'd of course go back in time and kill baby Hitler.* I doubt any of them would make that claim today. After all, they all had the chance to accomplish the same thing metaphorically--without even having to kill a baby--by denying Trump the nomination, and they refused.
* Too bad no moderator had the wherewithal to ask whether they'd abort fetus Hitler.
Re: they think he's a genius
A big part of that is his teflon ability to escape consequences. They're not morons, they know he's a scoundrel. But that's precisely WHY they admire him. He gets away with it. He owns the libs.
The Manhattan case popped that bubble, and forced him into full 'rigged system' mode. It was certainly the weakest of the four cases, but it was the only one that rogue justices couldn't delay past Nov. The Hunter conviction took away his 'JB is behind all this' play, and forced him into utter disarray and crowd-size collapse. Worrisome. Like when you've got someone near checkmate and you must pivot from concern about their chess IQ to concern about their emotional IQ.
Life is a Cabaret...
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/17/opinion/indiana-christian-nationalist-republican-party.html
[Indiana lieutenant governor nominee] Beckwith’s elevation is the latest sign of a conflict splitting Republican parties nationwide, as G.O.P. activists demand ever greater levels of purity and belligerence from their leaders. I’ve written about this in Minnesota, where delegates to the state convention endorsed the Alex Jones acolyte Royce White for Senate, and in Colorado, where the state party recently called for the burning of Pride flags. Cadres of true believers inspired by Trump and by the religious movement that sees him as divinely ordained are seizing the party from the bottom up, much to the consternation of more traditional Republicans who thought they could indulge the MAGA movement without being overtaken by it.
I doubt any of them would make that claim today. After all, they all had the chance to accomplish the same thing metaphorically--without even having to kill a baby--by denying Trump the nomination, and they refused.
* Too bad no moderator had the wherewithal to ask whether they'd abort fetus Hitler.
Wouldn't work, Larry. Would only make the already-convinced choir happy.
They'd all just say they'd kill baby Hitler. If you confront them with what you view as their obvious hypocrisy of failing to stop Trump, they'd say, "Trump isn't Hitler."
And their political base would agree.
John Viril:
They'd all just say they'd kill baby Hitler. If you confront them with what you view as their obvious hypocrisy of failing to stop Trump, they'd say, "Trump isn't Hitler."
That they failed to stop Trump was a tangent.
I don't think they'd claim to want to kill baby Hitler today because the base is pro-Hitler.
John,
I don't think rumpt is Hitler either. For one thing, Hitler served in the military with distinction*. rumpt is, though, wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross (sorry, a bible). He thereby fulfills the prophecy left by...Sinclair Lewis? I thought so, but wiki is not sure...
Pappenheimer
*So did a lot of other very nasty people; please don't take this as "well, you gotta hand it to him." Just noting that rumpt is more of an empty suit.
"Looking past the tiresomely tedious double entendres."
Futurama has already given you a solution to this problem:
Farnsworth: I'm sorry, Fry, but astronomers renamed Uranus in 2620 to end that stupid joke once and for all.
Fry: Oh. What's it called now?
Farnsworth: Urectum.
(P.S. futurama is hands down the best SF TV show ever.)
RE: Reason for the impossibility of going back in time to kill Baby Hitler
In one of AC Clark's books (Childhood's End?) the aliens gift us a time screen where we can watch past events as they actually occurred. Everyone wants to watch the tomb of Jesus on Easter morning to see if He is actually resurrected. But all that anyone can see is a blank scree. It seems that if too many people want to view an event, then they get in each other's way making the event impossible to see.
Suppose there are too many time travelers wanting to kill baby Hitler? They just be tripping over each other on the way out of the space time continuum transit, thus making it impossible to kill baby Hitler.
P.S. Much better that a time traveler rigs it so Hitler gets accepted to the Vienna school of art and never gets involved in politics.
DP:
Everyone wants to watch the tomb of Jesus on Easter morning to see if He is actually resurrected. But all that anyone can see is a blank scree.
I don't think that was Childhood's End. That was the first sci-fi novel I ever read, and I remember a similar detail but slightly different. The Overlords gave humanity the means to observe history, and no major religions survived the observation of their actual origins.
To your point, though, there might be a quantum mechanical constraint. Observation of a past event might somehow alter the event the same way that observing a subatomic particle alters its trajectory.
Tony,
NBD on the name. All I would do is gently remind you.
"Hayek and others were seeking to ward off a repeat of the excesses of 'collectivism' that Mussolini, Hitler, and Stalin represented. Understandable at the time. Unfortunately, they didn't stop to consider what an extreme in the other direction might result in."
- That brings up an important point - unintended consequences. Any time someone creates some sort of theory or paradigm or -ism of any kind, it goes in unintended directions for the simple reason that not everyone who hears/reads any set of words is going to get the same message. Ultimately idea that is intended to apply to humans generally gets twisted out of shape by the nature of individuality and individual experience.
That's where Adam Smith went wrong, but it's where everybody goes wrong. Smith's Wealth of Nations was largely a reaction to the devastatingly bad consequences of the British government having a House of Lords. Specifically, he was reacting to the economic disaster created by the Corn Laws. French merchants were sending bread to England at much cheaper prices than the local lords were willing to sell it, so they passed tariffs to stick it to the French. Then, like greedy bastards everywhere, they cranked up their bread prices, creating a whole lot of misery and starvation all over the Union. Smith was specifically commenting on one particular situation, one that did not exist in America or other nations. He wanted government out of regulating business because in the UK a powerful branch of the government was in business. (He also naively assumed that the human conscience and peer pressure would curb the excesses of predictably rapacious businessmen (and these days women).
This is yet another reason to distrust any kind of -ism. No matter what it purports to be, other people will turn it into something else, whatever suits their own egos and interests.
Hopefully I haven't triggered our host's shark-vaulting pole like I did last time.
Paul SB
DP, or gets Kaiser Billmenough spine to tell the Army "No", or one of the other stupid things that led to WW1.
Pappenheimer,
Agreed that Donald the Grope isn't Hitler. He's more like a cartoonish Benito Mussolini - same attitude and tactics, but far less intelligent or competent. That's why, back in 2016, I suggested his running mate should be Scrooge McDuck.
Paul SB
@DP I think you are referring to 'The Light of Other Days' which Clarke co-wrote with Tim Baxter.
Speaking of time-wimey matters, I recently came across an interesting piece of historical trivia. Apparently, there was a brief period in the early 1900s when Hitler, Stalin, Lenin, Arch-Duke Ferdinand, and Sigmund Freud were all living in Vienna within a couple of miles of each other.
Tony Fisk,
I'm aware of the Mont Pelerin Society. He was trying to revive classical liberalism in an age when many thought it best to keep the WWII approach to central planning of the economy. Economists around him were being treated as if they understood what to do when he was quite convinced they did not.
He left as his big book "Constitution of Liberty" came out. That book distinguishes his POV from that of the Mont Pelerin folks who were still in.
He produces another three volumes in the early 70's that sort of 'extend and revise' his position from the early 60's, but by then he was mostly a footnote of history. Others had already failed to understand his points especially the one regarding hubris.
He got his Nobel right about then. '74
"...for their pioneering work in the theory of money and economic fluctuations and for their penetrating analysis of the interdependence of economic, social and institutional phenomena."
-----
If y'all want to blame someone, consider blaming the bastardizers. They obviously failed to understand and Hayek knew this before his end came. Long before.
(Nibbles a bit more doughnut...)
Perhaps Hayek did come to realize what he had helped create in 'Neoliberalism'. He certainly voiced misgivings about how much power had come to rest in the hands of economists during his acceptance speech for the Nobel prize in 1974 (ironically wondering if there *should* be a Nobel Prize for economics.)
Nevertheless, help create neoliberalism he did, even if the blame for 'bastardising' his theories might lie more with Friedman, who appears to have taken over in the sixties.
It's not the first time an otherwise formidable intellect has made a slight miscalculation which has threatened to take over. Apart from Smith's rational man being taken over by the likes of Mills (and later Friedman), there's Darwin's adoption of 'survival of the fittest' to describe his theory of evolution. Not his initial words, but the eugenecists stoked to extremes.
(Nibbles a bit more doughnut...)
Perhaps Hayek did come to realize what he had helped create in 'Neoliberalism'. He certainly voiced misgivings about how much power had come to rest in the hands of economists during his acceptance speech for the Nobel prize in 1974 (ironically wondering if there *should* be a Nobel Prize for economics.)
Nevertheless, help create neoliberalism he did, even if the blame for 'bastardising' his theories might lie more with Friedman, who appears to have taken over in the sixties.
It's not the first time an otherwise formidable intellect has made a slight miscalculation which has threatened to take over. Apart from Smith's rational man being taken over by the likes of Mills (and later Friedman), there's Darwin's adoption of 'survival of the fittest' to describe his theory of evolution. Not his initial words, but the eugenecists stoked to extremes.
SpaceX may have to rescue the Starliner crew. Howard Hughes must be spinning.
Steve Bannon, in this Guardian puff piece, makes clear that he, at least, is fighting the war on expertise that Dr. Brin often describes.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2024/jun/24/steve-bannon-war-room-republican
"A question about how Bannon defines “Make America great again” (Maga) leads to a stream of consciousness that touches on “salt of the earth” guys he knew in the navy; Robert Clive, the British soldier and administrator; the American civil war (“Lincoln was an ultranationalist”); and today’s struggle between a credential class and the citizens denied a seat at the table.
“What the ruling class in our nation should fear is President Trump’s audience, from Wildwood, New Jersey, to South Bronx to Miami to Charlotte,” he says. “The commonality is that American citizens who work their ass off – the whole country depends on them – of every race and ethnicity don’t think they’re at the table and they don’t think anybody except Trump wants them at the table. Trump not only puts you in the room, he puts you at the head of the table and that’s why they [the elites] hate him and that’s why they have to destroy him.”
matthew quoting Steve Bannon:
“The commonality is that American citizens who work their ass off – the whole country depends on them – of every race and ethnicity don’t think they’re at the table and they don’t think anybody except Trump wants them at the table...."
In the musical Camelot, King Arthur banishes the knights who defy him, but doesn't have the heart to execute them. The banished knights are ripe to become Mordred's army.
Throughout history, America has banished (or at least tried to) hateful traditions like slavery, racism, and class privilege from the body politic. But like the banished knights, they have found their champion in Donald Trump, and are demanding to not only be heard again, but to be respected.
...and that’s why they have to destroy him.”
Damn straight. If it's them or us, I choose us.
Big picture look at MAGA, Trump, Bannon, global warming, etc.
You see this year is our last chance.
If trump is elected American democracy dies.
He has already promised that he will kill it aided and abetted by a widespread political movement of red state governors and a corrupt right-wing SCOTUS.
And if the American people are stupid/evil enough to reelect trump then American democracy deserves to die as we will have proven ourselves unworthy of being a free people. Hating and punishing people who are different from us will be far more important than being free.
If trump is elected the planet dies.
His gutting of environmental controls, workers safety protections and green energy will ensure billions die from heat domes that fry their brains and bodies, sterile acidic hot tub oceans, drought and famine, floods and fires collapsing the insurance industry, mass migration and mass death, collapsing birth rates caused largely by infections by micro plastics and forever chemicals, with the military creating a free fire zone along the Rio Grande while Europeans drown starving Africans in the Med. They already pay Libyan warlords to do that. We'll pay the Cartels.
Walls are sooo 20th century darling. The free fire zones will be patrolled by AI controlled drones programmed to make their own kill decisions. Whether it's the Med or the Sonoran Desert the killings will be out of site and out of mind. We'll be watching too much reality TV and internet porn to care.
It may already be too late.
Recent right-wing victories in the EU elections shows that racism as a political movement is now multinational. MAGA-ism as now on a global scale from Orban's Hungary to Modi's India to Brexit Britain. Mass migrations of dark-skinned people will make MAGA and all its local variations normal policy for most countries.
Such mass migrations are now a certainty because climate deniers and conspiracy theorists kept us from acting in time. Fossil fuel company profits being far more important than human life.
Welcome to the new normal.
More new normal
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/weve-hit-peak-denial-heres-why-we-cant-turn-away-from-reality/
If it seems like things are kind of off these days, you’re not alone. Recently, more than 100,000 people liked a post marking the start of the pandemic that said, “[Four] years ago, this week was the last normal week of our lives.”
Objectively speaking, we are living through a dumpster fire of a historical moment. Right now more than one million people are displaced and at risk of starvation in Gaza, as are millions more in Sudan. Wars are on the rise around the globe, and 2023 saw the most civilian casualties in almost 15 years.
H5N1 bird flu has jumped to cows, several farm workers have been infected, and scientists are warning about another potential pandemic. According to data from wastewater, the second biggest COVID surge occurred this winter. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates at least 24,000 people have died of COVID so far in 2024.
Last year was the hottest ever and recorded the highest number of billion-dollar weather and climate disasters. Not to mention that over the past few years, mass shootings have significantly increased, we’ve seen unparalleled attacks on democracy and science, and mental health issues have skyrocketed.
Truth be told, things were bananas even before the pandemic: just think of the Great Recession, the 2009 swine flu pandemic, and Brexit. Academics use terms like “polycrisis” and “postnormal times” to describe the breadth and scale of the issues we now face.
Welcome to the new normal, an age where many things that we used to deem unusual or unacceptable have become just what we live with. Concerningly, though, “living with it” means tolerating greater suffering and instability than we used to, often without fully noticing or talking about it. When authorities tell us to “resume normal activities” after an on-campus shooting or give guidance on how to increase our heat tolerance in an ever-hotter world, we may sense that something is awry even as we go along with it.
But what happens when overlooking and tolerating greater levels of harm becomes a shared cultural habit? Like the proverbial frog in boiling water, we acclimate to ignoring more and caring less at our own peril. In the short term, living in a state of peak denial helps us cope. In the long run, it will be our undoing. Because the danger here is desensitization: that we meet this unprecedented litany of “wicked problems,” from climate change to the rise of fascism, with passive acceptance rather than urgent collective action.
Welcome to the new normal!
But the percentage of people dying from pandemics and war this century is a tiny fraction of those percentages last century -
YES - things could and should be better!
But we ARE making massive progress!
Go back just a few decades and everything was much much worse
A weird day. In an online discussion, I described Jonas Salk as a hero. I was admonished for my ignorance - by a British scientist I greatly respect. Took me right back to those bad old days when I was verbally attacked for promoting such heresies as citizen science and secular humanism.
If trump is elected the planet dies.
Exaggerate much? Or, just certifiable?
Best
“Apparently, there was a brief period in the early 1900s when Hitler, Stalin, Lenin, Arch-Duke Ferdinand, and Sigmund Freud“
Stalin? Really?
--
Hayek was reacting with contrarian crit toward the “of course” assumptions of Keynesianism. Some of the crits were valid, though moderate Keynesians have been proved right far more often than not.
Where I fault Hayek is in his failure to notice THE salient fact of human governance and economics for 6000 years. That powerful men will conspire to make themselves lords and take other people’s property – and hopes – to give them to spoiled inheritance brat sons. Smith didn’t ignore that and neither did Marx. But Hayek mostly did. And he has that in common with all who keep pushing the re-feudalization of the world.
----
“SpaceX may have to rescue the Starliner crew. Howard Hughes must be spinning.”
Since Elon may be his avatar, why?
“Objectively speaking, we are living through a dumpster fire of a historical moment. “
Oh fer cripesake, will you please chill? Dang you youngsters are such snowflakes. Any randomly chosen WEEK of the year 1968 was worse than any whole year of recent memory, including this one. Damn if we can survive that year we can manage to suck in our guts and do the same thing now.
“If trump is elected the planet dies.”
It’s possible. But I have faith Mother Gaia can endure.
No. What it’ll mean is that the worldwide planetary putsch by inheritance brats, “ex” commies, current commies, casino mafiosi, nazis and idiocrats will have to be fought by means that go beyond mere law. A General Strike by the ‘credentialed castes’ Bannon hates, when they try to end the Civil Service Act, is just the minimum.
Re: Howard Hughes
Boeing (and a few others) are what Hughes Aircraft eventually became. Lofty dreams, now struggling. I hadn't thought of Musk as being Hughes' avatar, but that might alleviate the spinning somewhat.
“Apparently, there was a brief period in the early 1900s when Hitler, Stalin, Lenin, Arch-Duke Ferdinand, and Sigmund Freud“
Stalin? Really?
Um.. well, I read it on the internet, so ... there must be an article about it
(For good measure, Tito and Trotsky as well.)
Oh.. and Julian Assange has *finally* been released.
Mixed feelings about this. On a humanitarian side: high time! The whole affair has been a shabby, vindictive attempt to hide state failings. OTOH, I do think he had questions to answer (particularly in relation to the US 2016 election), but they were not the ones being asked.
“If trump is elected the planet dies.”
I wish this was an exaggeration.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/may/09/trump-oil-ceo-donation
Trump promised to scrap climate laws if US oil bosses donated $1bn – report
Trump promised to 20 executives at Mar-a-Lago dinner to increase oil drilling and reverse pollution rules among other pitches
I thought Hughes aircraft became Ratheon, not Boeing
duncan - "But we ARE making massive progress!"
We were.
Lief expectancy in the USA (78.9 years) peaked in 2014 and subsequently decreased significantly for three consecutive years, reaching 78.6 years in 2017.
It's now down to 76 years.
The last time a major power's life expectancy dropped was in the Soviet Union.
Right before it collapsed.
“The idiots take over the final days of crumbling civilizations. Idiot generals wage endless, unwinnable wars that bankrupt the nation. Idiot economists call for reducing taxes for corporation and the rich and cutting social service programs for the poor. They project economic growth on the basis of myth. Idiot industrialists poison the water, the soil, and the air, slash jobs and depress wages. Idiot bankers gamble on self-created financial bubbles. Idiot journalists and public intellectuals pretend despotism is democracy. Idiot intelligence operatives orchestrate the overthrow of foreign governments to create lawless enclaves that give rise to enraged fanatics. Idiot professors, "experts", and "specialists" busy themselves with unintelligible jargon and arcane theory that buttresses the policies of rulers. Idiot entertainers and producers create lurid spectacles of sex, gore and fantasy. There is a familiar checklist for extinction. We are ticking off every item on it.”
― Chris Hedges, America: The Farewell Tour
A further point on MAGA-ism being driven by migrations of undesirables and such migrations being driven by climate change:
The MAGA supporters don't have to be "white". Fear of being swamped by "other" is universal.
India, ruled by Modi and his Hindu-nationalism (the Indian equivalent of America's Christian nationalism or Europe's "blood and soil " parties) is completing a fence around the entire perimeter of Bangladesh.
Out of 4,096.70 kilometres (2,545.57 mi), which is the total length of International Border with Bangladesh, the Government of India initially sanctioned 3,406 kilometres (2,116 mi) of fencing along Indo-Bangladesh border.
By 2050, rising sea levels will submerge some 17 percent of the nation's land and displace about 20 million people. As the oceans rise more and more of Bangladesh goes under water. India cannot absorb 172 Muslim Bangladeshis.
Thus the need for a fence.
DP,
If rumpt gets elected, the planet doesn't die. Life will keep chugging along until the Big Burn in a few billion years. It might be just unicellular life a mile down, but still...
Our chances as a species do go down, though. Especially as a species with nifty toys like vaccines and books.
Pappenheimer
P.S. Clarke wrote that our problem is we have all our eggs in just one basket, and Pohl iirc wrote that as a species we don't have any huge problems, just a horrible complicated game we can't stop playing (involving money and weapons). You don't even want to read what Stross wrote, because it's too depressing. Dr. Brin is obviously pushing for the Star Trek future, but a lot of people seem to be intrigued by the Mad Max future. Not sure we can have both. As a history major, I think our odds lean a bit towards Max (4.1 on a scale from 1 - 10) but hey, we haven't blown ourselves up yet, which would have shocked 20-year old me. Maybe we can keep the game going and hit 7 before we crap out.
Larry,
I think I must have mentioned that book before. I have a vague recollection of you brining up your familiarity with the author before. Do you know anywhere I can get a new hippocampus? Mine's pretty useless these days. A few days ago I remembered something I wanted to bring up w/ Dr. Brin from another book after talking with my son about it, and five minutes later it was gone.
Have I mentioned a seriously good one called "The Midnight Kingdom" by Jared Yates Sexton? I'm listening to it a second time. The book traces the origins of the kind of ridiculous extremism we see on the Religious Right, going all the way back to the Roman Empire in the first chapter, then on up the centuries to the point when millionaire TV preachers found they could make more money by fear mongering about contemporary issues and endorsing Republican candidates.
Paul SB
I suspect that the planet dies isn't very likely. The planet has survived some pretty dire mass extinctions before. What is much more likely to happen if America's Most Obvious Conman gets elected again is that he will roll back all environmental protections - just like every Republican does - and feed all our money to big corporations, including the petroleum oligarchy - just like every other Republican. The difference is that the Mango Mussolini will try to turn the office of the President into a life-long position, like it was in the Soviet Union. Every subsequent election will be a "unanimous" Republican victory. The more or less permanent removal of all protections for the people and promotion of the rapacious interests of the Executive Caste will certainly accelerate the current climate crisis and increase the death toll.
That said, if no Republican is ever elected again and the US makes a solid effort to combat the problem, it's still going to get worse for many decades before it gets better, and the death toll for the 21st Century will be enormous either way. This crisis has been 250 years in the making, it isn't going to be fixed over night. Given that big business has far more control over governments all over the world than the people who will die, I wouldn't bet on there being much more than a lot of greenwashing in public while corporations screw all of our protections behind the scenes.
On that cheery note...
Paul SB
Aw man. It's reported Ukrainian forces attacked and damaged the Russian Long-Range Space Communications near Yevpatoria in Crimea. A legit target but featuring a top radio astronomy dish that used to do SETI work, before Russia invaded. https://www.iswresearch.org/
Tony Fisk,
I'm pretty sure Hayek would have rejected the notion that he helped create movements that failed to understand him. I'm fairly sure he would suggest the blame landed squarely on them.
His realizing that students and their students fail to comprehend occurred long before his end of days. He saw what happened to the ideas that Keynes put forward and knew Keynes well enough to know that Keynes students did not accurately represent Keynes to the next generation. "Keynesians" came to be a term he strongly disliked and said so in print when he pointed out that they weren't Keynesian at all. Didn't do much good, of course, as they thought him guilty of professional jealousy.
The upshot of all that was his refusal to tolerate people who referred to themselves as Hayekian. In later years when he needed help writing and finishing books, he wouldn't tolerate those who could not handle German fluently because they'd fail miserably to understand his original notes. His refusal lasted all the way up to his final couple years when he weakened… and the last book printed under his name [The Fatal Conceit] has a VERY different look and feel to it. Hayek's earlier material was dense and academic while the last book was actually readable. That means it likely represents the POV of the editor W.W. Bartley III.
It's not the first time an otherwise formidable intellect has made a slight miscalculation which has threatened to take over.
Pfft. No kidding. Look what people did to Marx. 80-100M dead in the 20th century alone.
I think it foolish, though, to blame the founder of an idea when their concepts gets bastardized later… by bastards… with a need to rationalize what they intend to do anyway. Are we to blame Darwin for the US flavor of 'social darwinism'? What about the Russian and German flavors? Shall we examine the consequences of assigning that blame? Well… the idea for evolution didn't start with Darwin. It actually came from economics through Darwin's family.
No. I reject that blame game and look more at the intent of bastards who want to harm people. SOME ideas* are particularly useful to bastards and we need to label them as such, but blame for later atrocities should be assigned locally to the monsters.
*Examples can be found among Plato's and Hegel's work. [Read Popper for details…. yet another Vienna guy.] All fools who wanted to treat history as if it was a science were playing with nuclear fire.
David,
Where I fault Hayek is in his failure to notice THE salient fact of human governance and economics for 6000 years.
Yah. That's not unfair. I think he was aware if it, but he wrote mostly about what liberal democracies where choosing to do when the interests of liberty and democracy were not aligned. He squarely sided with liberty over democracy and was on record suggesting that the US had likely expanded the franchise too far. His argument for this showed he trusted educated men to make better decisions regarding the liberty of all men compared to the decisions made by uneducated men. Better the benign dictator so to speak. Very Vienna.
Yah. Education implied wealth back then. Still does mostly. His preferred voters were people who were well off enough that they wouldn't vote the interests of their income. VERY idealistic as I think it is clear that every voter does that.
———
In the last three-volume 'book' he had a partial recommendation for anyone setting up a new liberal democracy that might partially avoid the issue. He advocated two distinct legislatures. One was allowed to decide the actions of government. The other was allowed to turn moral rules into criminal laws. No mixing was to be tolerated. The first could operate in a manner that was close to majoritarian. The second required super majorities to get ANYTHING done… and the people dealing with moral laws were given near-lifetime appointments with a mandatory retirement age.
He didn't expect any existing liberal democracy to adopt his suggestions from those last books. They read more as "What have we learned so far?" and might be useful in the future. Kinda like applied political philosophy. 8)
Oh Alfred! I don't explicitly blame Smith, or Hayek, or Marx, or Darwin for what was done in their names.
I realise that problems almost never have one root cause. As you infer, misinterpretations, unintentional and otherwise, can propagate wildly if unchecked.
However, if I may say so, your defence of Hayek does suggest he wasn't very good at ensuring his ideas were properly understood.
Hmm, looks like Assange has a couple more hoops to jump through before he's let home.
Where I fault Hayek is in his failure to notice THE salient fact of human governance and economics for 6000 years.
It's interesting that Hayek's 1974 Nobel acceptance speech included the following remark:
"The Nobel prize confers on an individual an authority which in economics no man ought to possess."
It strikes me as a recognition that one person wielding one economic theory has far too much power. Apart from what they might do, they are also vulnerable to control and manipulation by oligarchs. The 'bastardisation' Alfred refers to.
It may be coincidence, but Hayek left the Mont Pelerin Society at around the same time Eisenhower gave his farewell presidential speech warning of the growing influence of the military-industrial complex.
Alfred Differ:
Better the benign dictator so to speak. Very Vienna.
I see where the idea of a benign dictator, or a benign ruling class, is attractive. The whims of the people can seem turbulent and chaotic, and the idea of leaving governing to trained professionals who know how things work sounds good in theory. One problem in practice, though, is that in most professions, trained professionals can be held to standards and fired if they fail to perform adequately or prove unqualified for the job. The benign dictator or ruling class have no such constraint.
Yah. Education implied wealth back then. Still does mostly. His preferred voters were people who were well off enough that they wouldn't vote the interests of their income. VERY idealistic
That was the appeal Donald Trump made in 2016. "I'm so rich, I can't be bought." As Lieutenant Uhura once put it, "Sorry, neither."
Alfred Differ: All fools who wanted to treat history as if it was a science
From an old article of mine:
"There is not as yet (and may never be) a set of formulae that can chart humanity's course as in Foundation. However, it may soon be possible to accurately model a form of psychohistory computationally.
Ships are safe in harbour, but that's not what ships are for. Computers are great amusement, but that's not what computation is for.
Larry (again),
I just noticed that you responded to me re: a line about Disney, but I'm quite sure that wasn't my line (not that I greatly object, though). But that was a Pappenheimer line.
Paul SB
Alfred,
Are you beginning to get why it doesn't pay to worship heroes and apply their labels to yourself?
Jesus might have been a nice guy, and if I should somehow meet him, I'd tell him so, but I'll never call myself Christian because the name is forever tainted with rivers of blood. Same goes for Hayek, Smith, Marx, Darwin - whoever. I just take the ideas from people that seem to work the best and try to keep up with the data. Smorgasbordism, maybe?
Paul SB
Alfred,
Are you beginning to get why it doesn't pay to worship heroes and apply their labels to yourself?
Jesus might have been a nice guy, and if I should somehow meet him, I'd tell him so, but I'll never call myself Christian because the name is forever tainted with rivers of blood. Same goes for Hayek, Smith, Marx, Darwin - whoever. I just take the ideas from people that seem to work the best and try to keep up with the data. Smorgasbordism, maybe?
Paul SB
Alfred,
Are you beginning to get why it doesn't pay to worship heroes and apply their labels to yourself?
Jesus might have been a nice guy, and if I should somehow meet him, I'd tell him so, but I'll never call myself Christian because the name is forever tainted with rivers of blood. Same goes for Hayek, Smith, Marx, Darwin - whoever. I just take the ideas from people that seem to work the best and try to keep up with the data. Smorgasbordism, maybe?
Paul SB
One of our lurker members sent me a punny comment :
"Apparently, there was a brief period in the early 1900s when Hitler, Stalin, Lenin, Arch-Duke Ferdinand, and Sigmund Freud....
.....walked into a bar.
A bit too early for an episode of Young Indiana Jones, but the same melting pot to dip one's pen into. Just think of the sudden discovery of the "Sigmund Diaries." "
If any of you never saw the Young Indiana Jone Chronicles... it was a very interesting show with serious intellectual chops and kinda proves that aliens or someone severely loboto,ized George Lucus, after this show and before the prequels/
I gather (from the article I linked to) that someone did write a radio play imagining the sort of consultation Freud might have had with Herr Hitler.
... and it seems that Trotsky and Hitler frequented the same coffee shops. Running in the same circles, Trotsky certainly ran into Stalin. From his later account, he seems to have picked up that Stalin was trouble from the start.
Correction to initial remark: Lenin is *not* mentioned as being present. (actually in Krakow, although Stalin did visit him in the same period)
From the article I linked, someone did write a radio play imagining a consultation Freud might have had with Herr Hitler.
... and it seems Trotsky and Hitler frequented the same coffee shops (which doubled as debating arenas) although there's no record of them actually meeting. Trotsky did meet Stalin (unsurprisingly) and, from his later account, considered him trouble from the start.
I incorrectly said Lenin was also in Vienna at that time. He wasn't. He was living in Krakow, but Stalin did visit him in that period (January 1913).
... bar. Coffee shop. Whatever.
(Blogger seems to be eating comments at present, or I'm in the spam bin. Will clean up stuff if/when they're published)
Dr Brin:
Hitler, Stalin, Lenin, Arch-Duke Ferdinand, and Sigmund Freud....
Betraying my age and tv habit, my first thought was "Sigmund and the Sea Monsters."
Alfred,
Are you beginning to get why it doesn't pay to worship heroes and apply their labels to yourself?
Jesus might have been a nice guy, and if I should somehow meet him, I'd tell him so, but I'll never call myself Christian because the name is forever tainted with rivers of blood. Same goes for Hayek, Smith, Marx, Darwin - whoever. I just take the ideas from people that seem to work the best and try to keep up with the data. Smorgasbordism, maybe?
Paul SB
Alfred,
Are you beginning to get why it doesn't pay to worship heroes and apply their labels to yourself?
Jesus might have been a nice guy, and if I should somehow meet him, I'd tell him so, but I'll never call myself Christian because the name is forever tainted with rivers of blood. Same goes for Hayek, Smith, Marx, Darwin - whoever. I just take the ideas from people that seem to work the best and try to keep up with the data. Smorgasbordism, maybe?
Paul SB
Alfred,
Are you beginning to get why it doesn't pay to worship heroes and apply their labels to yourself?
Jesus might have been a nice guy, and if I should somehow meet him, I'd tell him so, but I'll never call myself Christian because the name is forever tainted with rivers of blood. Same goes for Hayek, Smith, Marx, Darwin - whoever. I just take the ideas from people that seem to work the best and try to keep up with the data. Smorgasbordism, maybe?
Paul SB
Alfred,
Are you beginning to get why it doesn't pay to worship heroes and apply their labels to yourself?
Jesus might have been a nice guy, and if I should somehow meet him, I'd tell him so, but I'll never call myself Christian because the name is forever tainted with rivers of blood. Same goes for Hayek, Smith, Marx, Darwin - whoever. I just take the ideas from people that seem to work the best and try to keep up with the data. Smorgasbordism, maybe?
Paul SB
A scene out of Atlas Shrugged.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/railroad-bridge-between-south-dakota-and-iowa-collapses-among-midwest-flooding
A railroad bridge collapsed during flooding in the Midwestern U.S. that has led to water rescues, evacuations and at least one death and has brought additional misery during a vast and stubborn heat wave.
The bridge connecting North Sioux City, South Dakota, with Sioux City, Iowa, collapsed into the Big Sioux River late Sunday, an emergency manager said. Images from local media showed a large span of the steel bridge partially underwater as floodwaters rushed over it.
Alfred,
Are you beginning to get why it doesn't pay to worship heroes and apply their labels to yourself?
Jesus might have been a nice guy, and if I should somehow meet him, I'd tell him so, but I'll never call myself Christian because the name is forever tainted with rivers of blood. Same goes for Hayek, Smith, Marx, Darwin - whoever. I just take the ideas from people that seem to work the best and try to keep up with the data. Smorgasbordism, maybe?
Paul SB
Alfred,
Are you beginning to get why it doesn't pay to worship heroes and apply their labels to yourself?
Jesus might have been a nice guy, and if I should somehow meet him, I'd tell him so, but I'll never call myself Christian because the name is forever tainted with rivers of blood. Same goes for Hayek, Smith, Marx, Darwin - whoever. I just take the ideas from people that seem to work the best and try to keep up with the data. Smorgasbordism, maybe?
Paul SB
Tony,
However, if I may say so, your defence of Hayek does suggest he wasn't very good at ensuring his ideas were properly understood.
That's an understatement! His intended audience was other academics who would just have to cope with his ultra-dense, rather German writing style. Popper was almost as difficult to read.
Keynes as much more approachable and liked in his time, but his material also got bastardized by others who didn't know the meaning of hubris. Hayek is on record lamenting Keynes' early demise saying that he was certain Keynes would have been able to rein then in.
———
It strikes me as a recognition that one person wielding one economic theory has far too much power.
If you get a chance to read The Use of Knowledge in Society you'll see the clearest case of what Hayek was driving at. Read carefully and you'll see it aligns rather well with what our host pitches.
Of all the things Hayek wrote, I think this essay is the most important. He's usually remembered better for the Road to Serfdom book, but Use of Knowledge gets to the heart of why we simply MUST educate everyone and knock down barriers to their participation in our markets. Voting rights are actually secondary to a person's right to participate fairly in the markets.
————————————
Larry,
The benign dictator or ruling class have no such constraint.
Nah. They can always be shot.
I'm not joking. It's actually harder to overthrow a malignant cadre of professionals. Small wonder the dictators surround themselves with such groups and provide for their care and feeding.
I think Hayek could get away with his POV at the time because Austrian royals weren't looking in his direction, but Serbians of the time might have seen things different. Post-WWI Vienna was a different place yet again.
The history of some of these folks from central Europe in the early 20th century is tortured and convoluted even if they only had one Jewish grandparent. That they saw the world different than we do should surprise no one.
———
"I'm so rich, I can't be bought."
Ugh. Yah. I remember that and feeling like someone was pissing on me.
Hayek's concern was that employees can be moved to vote in the best interests of their jobs. [Eisenhower had something to say on that too and Tony pointed out.] Of course they can, but shareholders and property owners think along similar lines.
Separation of Church and State helps keep the religious carnage to a minimum, but we really need a separation of Market and State. Won't happen, though, because we'd have no way to punish cheaters short of vigilantism. If we dig into history we'd probably find governments were born from such a need whether it involved effective responses to raiders or dividing scarce water resources.
Tony,
However, if I may say so, your defence of Hayek does suggest he wasn't very good at ensuring his ideas were properly understood.
That's an understatement! His intended audience was other academics who would just have to cope with his ultra-dense, rather German writing style. Popper was almost as difficult to read.
Keynes as much more approachable and liked in his time, but his material also got bastardized by others who didn't know the meaning of hubris. Hayek is on record lamenting Keynes' early demise saying that he was certain Keynes would have been able to rein then in.
———
It strikes me as a recognition that one person wielding one economic theory has far too much power.
If you get a chance to read The Use of Knowledge in Society you'll see the clearest case of what Hayek was driving at. Read carefully and you'll see it aligns rather well with what our host pitches.
Of all the things Hayek wrote, I think this essay is the most important. He's usually remembered better for the Road to Serfdom book, but Use of Knowledge gets to the heart of why we simply MUST educate everyone and knock down barriers to their participation in our markets. Voting rights are actually secondary to a person's right to participate fairly in the markets.
————————————
Larry,
The benign dictator or ruling class have no such constraint.
Nah. They can always be shot.
I'm not joking. It's actually harder to overthrow a malignant cadre of professionals. Small wonder the dictators surround themselves with such groups and provide for their care and feeding.
I think Hayek could get away with his POV at the time because Austrian royals weren't looking in his direction, but Serbians of the time might have seen things different. Post-WWI Vienna was a different place yet again.
The history of some of these folks from central Europe in the early 20th century is tortured and convoluted even if they only had one Jewish grandparent. That they saw the world different than we do should surprise no one.
———
"I'm so rich, I can't be bought."
Ugh. Yah. I remember that and feeling like someone was pissing on me.
Hayek's concern was that employees can be moved to vote in the best interests of their jobs. [Eisenhower had something to say on that too and Tony pointed out.] Of course they can, but shareholders and property owners think along similar lines.
Separation of Church and State helps keep the religious carnage to a minimum, but we really need a separation of Market and State. Won't happen, though, because we'd have no way to punish cheaters short of vigilantism. If we dig into history we'd probably find governments were born from such a need whether it involved effective responses to raiders or dividing scarce water resources.
Alfred,
Are you beginning to get why it doesn't pay to worship heroes and apply their labels to yourself?
Jesus might have been a nice guy, and if I should somehow meet him, I'd tell him so, but I'll never call myself Christian because the name is forever tainted with rivers of blood. Same goes for Hayek, Smith, Marx, Darwin - whoever. I just take the ideas from people that seem to work the best and try to keep up with the data. Smorgasbordism, maybe?
Paul SB
Alfred,
Are you beginning to get why it doesn't pay to worship heroes and apply their labels to yourself?
Jesus might have been a nice guy, and if I should somehow meet him, I'd tell him so, but I'll never call myself Christian because the name is forever tainted with rivers of blood. Same goes for Hayek, Smith, Marx, Darwin - whoever. I just take the ideas from people that seem to work the best and try to keep up with the data. Smorgasbordism, maybe?
Paul SB
Alfred,
Are you beginning to get why it doesn't pay to worship heroes and apply their labels to yourself?
Jesus might have been a nice guy, and if I should somehow meet him, I'd tell him so, but I'll never call myself Christian because the name is forever tainted with rivers of blood. Same goes for Hayek, Smith, Marx, Darwin - whoever. I just take the ideas from people that seem to work the best and try to keep up with the data. Smorgasbordism, maybe?
Paul SB
Alfred,
Are you beginning to get why it doesn't pay to worship heroes and apply their labels to yourself?
Jesus might have been a nice guy, and if I should somehow meet him, I'd tell him so, but I'll never call myself Christian because the name is forever tainted with rivers of blood. Same goes for Hayek, Smith, Marx, Darwin - whoever. I just take the ideas from people that seem to work the best and try to keep up with the data. Smorgasbordism, maybe?
Paul SB
Alfred,
Are you beginning to get why it doesn't pay to worship heroes and apply their labels to yourself?
Jesus might have been a nice guy, and if I should somehow meet him, I'd tell him so, but I'll never call myself Christian because the name is forever tainted with rivers of blood. Same goes for Hayek, Smith, Marx, Darwin - whoever. I just take the ideas from people that seem to work the best and try to keep up with the data. Smorgasbordism, maybe?
Paul SB
Alfred,
Are you beginning to get why it doesn't pay to worship heroes and apply their labels to yourself?
Jesus might have been a nice guy, and if I should somehow meet him, I'd tell him so, but I'll never call myself Christian because the name is forever tainted with rivers of blood. Same goes for Hayek, Smith, Marx, Darwin - whoever. I just take the ideas from people that seem to work the best and try to keep up with the data. Smorgasbordism, maybe?
Paul SB
Alfred,
Are you beginning to get why it doesn't pay to worship heroes and apply their labels to yourself?
Jesus might have been a nice guy, and if I should somehow meet him, I'd tell him so, but I'll never call myself Christian because the name is forever tainted with rivers of blood. Same goes for Hayek, Smith, Marx, Darwin - whoever. I just take the ideas from people that seem to work the best and try to keep up with the data. Smorgasbordism, maybe?
Paul SB
Alfred,
Are you beginning to get why it doesn't pay to worship heroes and apply their labels to yourself?
Jesus might have been a nice guy, and if I should somehow meet him, I'd tell him so, but I'll never call myself Christian because the name is forever tainted with rivers of blood. Same goes for Hayek, Smith, Marx, Darwin - whoever. I just take the ideas from people that seem to work the best and try to keep up with the data. Smorgasbordism, maybe?
Paul SB
Some folks have emailed me that their comments are not appearing on this thread.Some of you chime in to test this? Mine are appearing.
I failed to do a weekend blog. I'll put one up and see if that refreshes the process.
Why Assange was in Saipan.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cxww278gr0zo
In settings it says anyone with a google account can comment...
Alfred,
Are you beginning to get why it doesn't pay to worship heroes and apply their labels to yourself?
Jesus might have been a nice guy, and if I should somehow meet him, I'd tell him so, but I'll never call myself Christian because the name is forever tainted with rivers of blood. Same goes for Hayek, Smith, Marx, Darwin - whoever. I just take the ideas from people that seem to work the best and try to keep up with the data. Smorgasbordism, maybe?
Paul SB
Alfred,
Are you beginning to get why it doesn't pay to worship heroes and apply their labels to yourself?
Jesus might have been a nice guy, and if I should somehow meet him, I'd tell him so, but I'll never call myself Christian because the name is forever tainted with rivers of blood. Same goes for Hayek, Smith, Marx, Darwin - whoever. I just take the ideas from people that seem to work the best and try to keep up with the data. Smorgasbordism, maybe?
Paul SB
On the subject of contemporary fantasy/science fiction film, I suspect portions of the uplift series would be filmable with current tech. might be a good idea to let overworked story lines lie fallow for a while anyway.
Sigh. Good news about Assange. But...the Supreme Morons have actually ruled that law allows state and local officials to take gifts for past actions.
Seriously.
Looks like we can post again?
I blame Republicans. :)
Dr Brin:
"Apparently, there was a brief period in the early 1900s when Hitler, Stalin, Lenin, Arch-Duke Ferdinand, and Sigmund Freud..
Showing my age and my tv preferences, my first thought was, "Sigmund and the Sea Monsters"/
Tim H:
might be a good idea to let overworked story lines lie fallow for a while anyway.
I see what you did there. :)
I've been considering the Glavers' redemption path if Trump is re-elected. Or the alternative of using the method Christopher Reeve did in Somewhere In Time to go back to 1977.
What SCOTUS did today in Synder was predictable - they legalized their *own* bribery, immunizing Alito and Thomas (at the very least) from prosecution for accepting lavish gifts.
The Roberts Court has, over the course of his tenure, utterly destroyed the ability to prosecute political figures for bribery.
This is not an accident. The GOP has a vested interest in oligarch cash and gifts. This is a long-term goal of the Federalist Society, to allow the wealthy to buy access and rulings at the highest levels of government.
Glad the comments are rolling again. I twiddle some settings but nothing that looked like it should work. But something did. Now if I can only get the Brother printer connected to my Mac, again. Oh and if only JoBee will trash the orange pile of hair-dye, tanning color and thick makeup that calls itself a man.
Some say he won't show up, but he really should be happy to.
He's about to receive something he enjoys - an epic spanking.
Dr. Brin likes to talk about the war against science, but he rarely mentions the enemies in university humanities departments.
Even though the most people consider "universities" as monolithic institutions, the post-modernist humanities departments are the mortal enemies of science.
At its core, post-modernism rejects the notion of an objective reality. OTOH, science is built upon the presumption that objective reality exists and can be quantified and understood through experiment.
In the end, post-modernism and science are inherently incompatible.
I must confess, I don't think much of post-modernism---mostly because its advocates don't really believe that reality is purely subjective when push comes to shove. My favorite response to somoeone who insists only subjective belief exists is to tell them I'd be happy to listen to their arguments about subjective reality AFTER they put a gun to their head and pull the trigger.
If reality is indeed subjective, well, then they won't be subjectively dead.
Somehow, none of those post-modernists actually believe their own arguments.
'Walked into a bar...'???
This being Vienna, 1913, a coffee shop would be more appropriate ;-)
... and it seems Trotsky and Hitler *did* frequent the same coffee shops (which doubled as debating arenas) although there's no record of them actually meeting. Trotsky did meet Stalin (unsurprisingly) and, from his later account, considered him trouble from the start.
From the article I linked, someone *did* write a radio play imagining a consultation Freud might have had with Herr Hitler.
I incorrectly said Lenin was also in Vienna at that time. He wasn't. He was living in Krakow, but Stalin did visit him in that period (January 1913).
@John David does occasionally refer to the influence in University art departments as a currently minor irritation.
John,
What you are talking about is the most extreme form of post-modernism. Unfortunately, the extremists are the ones who tend to make the most noise. Postmodernism began as a critique not of science or scientific epistemology, but of how many scientists in practice promote themselves as authorities rather than sticking to the scientific method. It's been a long time since I was in grad school, but at that time there was the beginning of a revolt by the more sane people against the extremists. I wish I had kept up with it, because it was looking hopeful. The Humanities have never been very interested in science, so that kind of lunacy shouldn't be uncommon there. I doubt, however, that it is true of all humanities departments or professors, though.
Paul SB
Alfred,
Are you beginning to get why it doesn't pay to worship heroes and apply their labels to yourself?
Jesus might have been a nice guy, and if I should somehow meet him, I'd tell him so, but I'll never call myself Christian because the name is forever tainted with rivers of blood. Same goes for Hayek, Smith, Marx, Darwin - whoever. Nothing anyone says will not be distorted by those who want to use someone else's authority for their own advantage. I just take the ideas from people that seem to work the best and try to keep up with the data. Smorgasbordism, maybe?
Paul SB
John Viril:
At its core, post-modernism rejects the notion of an objective reality.
You're opening the door to my favorite bit from 1984. The long-time regulars here are already sick of me using it as a reference.
Winston shrank back upon the bed. Whatever he said, the swift answer crushed him like a bludgeon. And yet he knew, he KNEW, that he was in the right. The belief that nothing exists outside your own mind — surely there must be some way of demonstrating that it was false? Had it not been exposed long ago as a fallacy? There was even a name for it, which he had forgotten. A faint smile twitched the corners of O'Brien's mouth as he looked down at him.
‘I told you, Winston,' he said, ‘that metaphysics is not your strong point. The word you are trying to think of is solipsism. But you are mistaken. This is not solipsism. Collective solipsism, if you like. But that is a different thing: in fact, the opposite thing.
* * *
If reality is indeed subjective, well, then they won't be subjectively dead.
They would if they believe they would.
I get your point, but that doesn't seem to be the correct challenge.
Somehow, none of those post-modernists actually believe their own arguments.
“The point is that we are all capable of believing things which we know to be untrue, and then, when we are finally proved wrong, impudently twisting the facts so as to show that we were right. Intellectually, it is possible to carry on this process for an indefinite time: the only check on it is that sooner or later a false belief bumps up against solid reality, usually on a battlefield.” - George Orwell (again)
Post a Comment