Archive for August, 2006

Just Don’t Call It Fascism

Saturday, August 26th, 2006

I’ve been assembling material for an essay about the promiscuous use of the word “fascism” for some time. Though my ideas are not hammered completely into shape this Geoffy Nunberg article ably expresses my general views.

…it’s the point of symbolic words such as “fascist” to ease the burden of thought — as Walter Lippmann observed, they “assemble emotions after they’ve been detached from their ideas.”

Geoffrey Nunberg Who are you calling a fascist?

It’s struck me since my youthier days that the word fascism is almost always used as a substitute for bad, as humongous is used, in giganticism-obsessed America, as a substitute for big. Almost everytime I hear the word fascism or fascist I am pretty sure that the brain sending it out hasn’t the slightest idea of what real fascism was.

Just for starters I’d like to remind folks that “fascist” and “nazi” were words chosen by those people themselves, not something thrust upon them as dirty words. Tens of thousands of people indentified themselves with pride as fascists and nazis. They then created the horror which we refer to by those chosen names.

This seems a good model to follow: let people name themselves. Call them what they want to be called as we describe their evil actions. Two I have in mind are the Caliphate Reconstructionists and the Christian Reconstructionists. Each of these groups have visions of earthly life that if carried out would make a hell on earth for most of us. What they do in the name of their beliefs should be shown regularly, talked about, understood, resisted; they should not be taken lightly. But call them by their chosen name: so shall we know them.

Establishing security for ourselves and others depends on our knowing which dangers are real, what sights and sounds give us warning –and which sights and sounds are distractors, noises, false warnings, deceptions and merely, goulish fascinators. Calling others fascists is neither accurate nor useful. Let’s call them what they are.

Science Friday: Fatherhood and Authority

Friday, August 25th, 2006

Breaking science news! According to a CNN interview astrologers are having nothing to do with the demotion of Pluto to dwarf planet status. Much too important to certain behavior patterns on earth… Now, back to our regularly scheduled program.

Since it’s Friday and since fathers around the globe are blowing up each other’s children I thought it would be interesting to offer a post on other ways of being a father.

The book is question is “The Good Father: On Men, Masculinity, and Life in the Family” by Mark O’Connel.

A nice discussion of it begins over at ScienceBlogs by Bora Zivkovik, “a Red-State Serbian Jewish atheist liberal PhD student with Thesis-writing block and severe blogorrhea trying to understand the world by making strange connections between science, religion, brain, language and sex.”

The money quotes are:

… the difference between authoritarian and authoritative … To be authoritarian is to use too much force for wrong reasons (e.g., to make a child do something for selfish reasons). To be authoritative is to use the right amount of force for right reasons (e.g., to make a child do something for the sake of the child).

And then, meet George!

with our focus on the two Lakoffian categories (because they neatly map onto two core political ideologies), we forget that there are more than two parenting styles. There is also an Abusive Parent (definitely authoritarian), a Neglectful Parent (too physically or emotionally absent to have any authority), and a Permissive Parent (too weak and non-confident to have much authority).

It is the Permissive Parent that the Right stereotypes the Left with, as the Core Conservatives (Regressives) are cognitively (and/or emotionally) incapable of comprehending Nurturant Parenting - it is too complex for their mental developmental stage. Thus, they talk about the “Nanny State”, “everything-goes liberal philosophy”, “moral relativism”, etc. - all reminiscent of Permissive Parenting, not Nurturant Parenting that liberal ideology really maps to.

Read On

Terrorist Dreams

Friday, August 25th, 2006
Naked Race

Now that I have your attention, here’s an interesting post by computer security maven Bruce Schneier.

The point of terrorism is to cause terror, sometimes to further a political goal and sometimes out of sheer hatred. The people terrorists kill are not the targets; they are collateral damage. And blowing up planes, trains, markets or buses is not the goal; those are just tactics. The real targets of terrorism are the rest of us: the billions of us who are not killed but are terrorized because of the killing. The real point of terrorism is not the act itself, but our reaction to the act.

And we’re doing exactly what the terrorists want.

He’s got a list of high-profile “terror events” that will raise both your eyebrows.

What the Terrorists Want

What’s sort of astounding to me is that in none of these cases it seems has anyone, or two, tried simply to engage these “oddly-acting” folks in conversatation. Try being a buttsky insky. You might find out they are just terrified of flying, don’t know the customs of frequent flyers or are eccentric in some way that will provide a good story for you. Worst case is that your friendly nosiness will distract them and you and others can get closer to what the hell the story is.

Iran: Today in the News

Thursday, August 24th, 2006

The House Intelligence Committee Republican staffers have just issued a report criticizing various U.S. intelligence agencies as overly cautious in their assessments of Iran. Whoo boy, here we go!

Update: Michael Rogers (MI-R) and on the House Intelligence committee is all over CNN, predicting the worst.

Mazzetti’s article in the NY Times is pretty muddled and filled with unidentifiable pieces of dim some — as in, “some senior Bush administration officials, some policy makers, some officials, some policy makers (again), some from Israel, several intelligence officials…” You get it. What’s hard to get is a bead on what is happening –either in Iran or among the mauled-but-still-barking dogs in Washington. However, let the article be a flashing light: something’s happening and we’d better pay attention.

Some in G.O.P. Say Iran Threat Is Played Down

On the other hand
Laura Rozen at the Washington Monthly
asks forthrightly:

Is the marketing campaign against Iran begun? Here was the deputy director of operations for the joint chief of staffs at the Pentagon yesterday:
(more…)

Immigrants Are Gonna Get Your Mama!

Wednesday, August 23rd, 2006

The fine German, Scots-Irish, Irish — American Pat Buchanan is just filled with lovely thoughts these days.

* “This [immigration] is an invasion, the greatest invasion in history.” [p. 5]
* “We are witnessing how nations perish. We are entered upon the final act of our civilization. The last scene is the deconstruction of the nations. The penultimate scene, now well underway, is the invasion unresisted.” [p. 6]
* “Chicano chauvinists and Mexican agents have made clear their intent to take back through demography and culture what their ancestors lost through war.” [p. 12]
* “[W]e are in the midst of a savage culture war in which traditionalist values have been losing ground for two generations.” [p. 28]
* “The first imperative is an immediate moratorium on all immigration, such as the one we imposed from 1924 to 1965. … But even with a moratorium, success is not assured.” [p. 250-251]

Hey Pat, for 2 cents, which immigrants were “a mongrel mass of ignorance and crime and superstition, utterly unfit for civilized life.” ? Bet you know…


Dont’ Buy This Book.

p.s. Thanks for your outspokenness on the occupation of Iraq but one wonders what lies below….

Tax Farmers, Mercenaries and Viceroys

Monday, August 21st, 2006

Paul Krugman does it again: brings little noticed events into relation and shows a large, unhappy truth.

Tax farmers, mercenaries and viceroys: why does the Bush administration want to run a modern superpower as if it were a 16th-century monarchy? Maybe people who’ve spent their political careers denouncing government as the root of all evil can’t grasp the idea of governing well. Or maybe it’s cynical politics: privatization provides both an opportunity to evade accountability and a vast source of patronage.

To find out what tax farmers, mercenaries and viceroys are you’ll have to read the article. I’ll post the whole thing once it appears outside the NY Times pay wall, but meanwhile here is the link - or treat yourself to the Times this morning.

Cluster Bombs

Saturday, August 19th, 2006

Cluster Bomb

Some real sick puppies invented these, and sicker ones used them.
Human Rights Watch has more photos.

StopClusterMunitions has a write up, and photos of some results.

Via The Skeptic.

Update: Frankly, I don’t know why this isn’t considered, and called, terrorism. More in the Telegraph, UK

Israel: Post Mortem

Friday, August 18th, 2006

From a link supplied by Juan Cole is this interesting post mortem of Israel’s attack on Lebanon done by Anthony Cordesman for the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

I don’t have time to make extensive commentary but here are some interesting clips of Cordesman’s analysis — which he caveats at the beginning as running the risk of being too hasty and therefore too shallow.

Some serving Israeli officials and officers claimed Israel had succeeded in this goal [of restoring the credibility of Israel's deterrent capability] , and that the deterrent impact would grow as Arab states and peoples saw the true scale of damage and refused to allow the Hezbollah and other non-state actors to operate on their soil because of the cost and risk. In contrast, Israeli experts outside of government felt that the fighting did weaken deterrence and did show Israel was vulnerable.

In general, both serving and non-serving Israelis seemed to underestimate the anger Israel’s strikes might generate, and the fact that the level of damage inflicted might create many more volunteers, make Arab populations far more actively hostile to Israel, strengthen the Iranian and Syrian regimes, and weaken moderate and pro-peace regimes like Egypt, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia.

(more…)

Science Friday: Whale Story

Friday, August 18th, 2006
Ballen Whale

From time to time it is good to talk about the evolution of a species instead of devolution into warring, rationalizing mad men.

I’ve been listening during commute times to the Origin of Species, Charlie Darwin’s famous book, read by an Englishman to give it proper authenticity. Fascinating stuff. Not the least fascinating to me is that contrary to the great howls from the fundamentalisticly stupid, the book is less about science, in some esoteric sense, than about thousands upon thousands of observations thought together in this theory just being born. Not a page goes by when he doesn’t refer to observations made of ants, pigeons, auks, geese, mules. His touch stone throughout is: if plant and animal breeders can alter varietes and species to such good effect who are we to think that nature — which he sometimes refers to as the Creator– can’t do it better? Men after all can only alter what they can see — the wool of sheep, the plumpness of strawberries. Nature can alter internal organs — can change bouyancy sacks to lungs, can change flippers to feet and back again!

This alteration takes place only when some marginal change in one set of creatures gives it an advantage over others in the same eco-space (he doesn’t use that word.) Advantage in progeny, that is. Once the progeny of B take up the space occupied by the progeny of A, end of story: survival and extinction. He makes it quite clear that this is not simply a struggle of blood, tooth and claw but rather a slow-motion replacement over thousands of generations as miniscule changes in bodies work their way through the chain of life. Absolutely fascinating stuff.

He was not alone in working this all through. Besides his great competitor Alfred Russel Wallace, thousands of very astute botantists, geologists, paleontologists, animal breeders –many of them highly skilled amateurs– were observing the minutest details of their specialites, publishing, discussing and considering. What is the origin of species was one of the great topics of the day, not something dreamed up in a stuffy attic.

So, here is a marvelous article about the evolution of Baleen Whales — from being fearsome toothed creatures into the mammoth baleen strainers we know today. I think you’ll enjoy the read. At least get down to the family tree!

The Origin of the Ridiculous

[Note: You can download a free copy of Origin of Species here, at the Gutenberg Project. There is also a free audio verision but it was created with text-to-speech technology which, while amazing as a technology is still pretty hard to listen to. The rhythms are near natural, but just enough off --especially in a work filled with dimly familiar words -- to make listening quite perplexing. I got my audio copy from audible.com which I paid for (not too much.) It's about 18 CDs long and I'd be glad to share with anyone interested. ]

Block Island Times Scoops the Plague

Wednesday, August 16th, 2006

In one of my many “careers” I was the lead seaman on the Block Island ferry, a shallow drafted car carrier making a two and a half hour trip from New London, Connecticut out to this low lying workingman’s Martha’s Vineyard. So it was with some wonder that I ran across this interesting report of center-of-the world stuff in the Block Island Times.

John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt, you may remember, published an article in the London Review of Books a month or so ago, raising the question of whether Israel and the U.S. Israel lobby had too much influence in Washington D.C. Folks in some quarters weren’t satisfied with calling for them to be ridden out of town on a rail; tar and feathers would have been better. Alan Dershowitz labled the mere asking of the question as anti-Semetic.

As it turns out the two men were invited panelists to the 57th Current Strategy Forum at the Naval War College in Newport, Rhode Island. For a few details read here. What is interesting however, is that Mearsheimer wound up his contribution by recalling his student days at West Point, the United States Military Academy.

An English professor had assigned his class to read French existentialist Albert Camus’ “The Plague.” The instructor explained that he was using the book as an allegory for what was happening in Vietnam: the plague came and went of its own accord - and humans “operated under the illusion that they could affect the plague one way or another.” Mearsheimer said he saw a similar dynamic afoot in Iraq.

“There are forces that we don’t have control over that are at play, and they will determine the outcome. I understand that’s very hard for Americans to understand, because Americans believe that they can shape the world in their interests.

“But I learned during the Vietnam years when I was a kid at West Point, that there are some things in the world that you just don’t control, and I think that’s where we’re at in Iraq.”

It was the end of the panel, and the predominately military audience broke out in applause.

Hat tip to War and Piece.

Evolution Throws Us A Conundrum

Wednesday, August 16th, 2006

If evolution, as so thoroughly described by Charles Darwin, is true, how do we explain Ann Coulter? In Darwin’s theory “natural selection can act only through and for the good of each being,” and yet there is Ann. It is only possible therefore, according to Madame, that God did it, which is de facto proof that He is not entirely all good and all knowing as she would have us believe.

Jerry Coyne, professor of Ecology and Evolution at the University of Chicago, has a wonderfully abusive review of Ann’s book Godless: The Church of Liberalism [I will not provide a link to ... ] over at Powell’s

The etiolated Coulter issued a piercing squawk this spring with her now-notorious book, Godless: The Church of Liberalism. Its thesis, harebrained even by her standards, is that liberals are an atheistic lot who have devised a substitute religion, replete with the sacraments of abortion, feminism, coddling of criminals, and — you guessed it — bestiality. Liberals also have their god, who, like Coulter’s, is bearded and imposing. He is none other than Charles Darwin. But the left-wing god is malevolent, for Coulter sees Darwin as the root cause of every ill afflicting our society, not to mention being responsible for the historical atrocities of Hitler and Stalin.

Read on, and don’t ever pay money for the book!

Oh, ow! I had to share his closing line with you.

Her case for ID involves the same stupid arguments that fundamentalists have made for a hundred years. They’re about as convincing as the blonde hair that gets her so much attention. By their roots shall ye know them.

Israel: The Aftermath

Monday, August 14th, 2006

Aluf Benn, the diplomatic editor for Ha’aretz, a major Israel newspaper, has a piece in Salon (ad view req.) on the first day of the cease fire with Hezbollah. Like many commentators he is fairly gloomy; like most also, he remains pretty parochial.

What will happen to Olmert’s government? What direction will the country take?

Notably he does not worry about the future of Israel — which is of course the bully stick all who worry about what Israel has done, are beaten with. Notably also, in my book, while he looks outside to Syria and worries that it’s power has been enhanced he makes only passing reference to Iran and none at all to the politics of Shiia vs. Sunni in the region — not even to comment how Israel’s actions have diminished the tension between the two sects, creating for the time being at least a much more formidable foe.

His article is worth the ad view to at least see how, contrary to U.S. supporters of Israel, some who are in-country and actually affected by the policies there have some pretty searching questions.

Aluf Benn on The Coming Earthquake in Salon

New Progressives

Monday, August 14th, 2006

As I have said before I believe that new technology (the internet) has created new circumstances in the political landscape. It’s as though climate change has brought rain to formerly drought sticken areas. New growth is happening, mostly at random and all sorts of “varieties” not yet “species” are still working out their place in various niches in the new ecology. Bloggers are no more than folks with strong social/political instincts who now have a decentralized, democratic means to express their views. As such, some trends, coalitions, finding of each other is happening. For some this is exciting; for some it is threatening. Matt Stoller who posts at MyDD picked this up at Roll Call:

.. the growing number of bloggers, which, as this source said, represent “the Democratic version of the Christian right.”

“They are a little bit scared of the bloggers,” the operative said of the party leadership.

Stoller goes on to muse about such views:

there’s something very different about the progressive movement that’s emerging today. We’re not an aggregation of single-issue voters, and we don’t operate through fear. Our rhetoric is hot, but it’s not irresponsible or atomizing, and it’s two-way. Unlike proposition 13 in California, which passed with low turnout in the late 1970s, our key fight in Connecticut was a high-turnout fight based on substantive public and private debate.

In other words, there’s a pluralistic element to what the progressive movement is doing that is quite populist and democratic. We are fundamentally arguing for a tolerant and pluralistic society, and we’re doing it aggressively and somewhat viciously. That’s why it’s so hard to pigeonhole.

Stoller at MyDD

Iran: Presidential Blogging

Monday, August 14th, 2006

Well I saw Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on 60 Minutes last night. Mike Wallace tried his usual tough guy approach and Ahmadinejad bobbed and weaved, managing to not answer certain questions while showing himself to be a pretty smart cookie — quick on his mental feet as it were, unlike other well known presidents. I for one object to the “I’m the interviewer I’ll control things around here” approach so it was interesting to see one interviewee who didn’t succumb. Wallace of course wanted to inflame things rather then draw out new information so he persisted in the “wiping off the map” line of questioning (which as most of the civilized world knows by now is a bad translation of an old formulaic in Arabic) and didn’t for example, querey him about material in Sy Hersh’s article ( see here and here) regarding US dreams for an Iran dry run in Lebanon.

Meanwhile Ahmadinejad has apparently started his own BLOG! Yep, it’s even hit the on-line news

Doug Ireland whose bio reveals he fancies himself in the mold of I.F. Stone has an interesting post on Ahmedinejad on his site, along with other matters — including Christian addiction to porn…hmm I think I ought to headline this, drive some traffic my way….

Fundamentalism: Escaping

Monday, August 14th, 2006

In the second in a series about authoritarianism at Orcinus, Sara Robinson reveals something rather astounding.

For the past five years, I’ve been a member of a large and busy online community of former fundamentalists. Through years of discussion, we’ve learned a lot from each other about how and why people become fundamentalists — and also how and why they find themselves inspired to leave authoritarian religion behind. We’ve noticed patterns in the various ways people are seduced into fundamentalism; and also a predictable progression in the steps they go through in the agonizing months and years after enlightenment dawns. We’ve also discovered that we seem to fall into readily-identifiable subgroups, and that each of these subgroups wanders down somewhat different paths and uses different techniques as they approach the wall, determinedly hoist themselves over it, and then set about coming to terms with life here on the reality-based side….

We must never, ever underestimate what it costs these people to let go of the beliefs that have sustained them. Leaving the safety of the authoritarian belief system is a three-to-five year process. Externally, it always means the loss of your community; and often the loss of jobs, homes, marriages, and blood relatives as well. Internally, it requires sifting through every assumption you’ve ever made about how the world works, and your place within it; and demands that you finally take the very emotional and intellectual risks that the entire edifice was designed to protect you from. You have to learn, maybe for the first time, to face down fear and live with ambiguity. On the scale of relative trauma, it’s right up there with a divorce after a long marriage; and it requires about the same amount and kind of grieving.

Orcinus: Fundamentalists II

Very interesting reading and while useful in helping us understand US fundamentalism, and how to chip away at the renewed interest in it, we should also come away with greater understanding of what is growing in the Islamic world. Hint: chaos and uncertainty drive people towards authoritarian solutions.

Cease Fire: To What End?

Sunday, August 13th, 2006

The news that purports to be hopeful on this Sunday is of a cease-fire in Lebanon to begin Monday at 8 a.m. local time. Whether this cessation of firing actually happens, and for how long, and to what end will only be seen as the world turns. We can be certain of course that the boys with the guns — Hezbollah and Israel alike — will not be turning out the lights to take a nap.

On the Israeli side the recriminations are all ready spitting: the milis saying the polis ruined their perfect plan; the polis saying the milis didn’t execute. Some are blaming Bush for pushing the inexperienced Olmert as early as May for a military blow against Hezbollah. There are calls for Olmert’s head from the revanchanist right and general agreement in the Israeli populace that the withdrawal of troops from the Gaza strip was a gesture of conciliation that has failed, and so eff em. The barrages of rockets into Israel’s north has been terrifying to all, but mostly injurious to the poor –mostly recent immigrants– who couldn’t escape to the south, and the Israeli Arabs, likewise poor, living there. One hundred dead as recent counts would have it. 250 rockets lobbed in today as if a turd in the ceasefire punch bowl.

The Lebanese, as far as I can read it, are mostly mourning. Even those who once lived in the south and appreciated the social services of Hezbollah didn’t seem to have a dog in this fight; they just got their bodies chewed up in the viciousness. Count is about one thousand dead plus destruction of home and neighborhood on a scale not seen since German and British raids in WW II: entire blocks are reduced to brick and dust. The Hezbollah fighters, despite their reputation for martyrdom, have learned the number one rule of all soldiers: the point is not to die for your country/faith it’s to kill for it. They have surprised the hell out of their adversaries and, according to some, are ushering in the birth of a new Middle East not quite as Con Rice is envisioning. Even those who cursed Hezbollah in the beginning have been heard, and seen, to be singing their praises.

Of course whatever is thought to be happening when marked off by the boundaries of Israel / Hezbollah-in-Lebanon takes on a whole other character when the boundaries are moved - to the US and Iran, for example. Seymour Hersh’s article in the New Yorker breaks into the open what has been going on between Israel and the U.S. Israel did not, he says, quoting others, ask permission to invade Lebanon. The U.S. was not unhappy that they did; in fact have known for some time that the desire was there; and felt it was a good thing.

Earlier this summer, before the Hezbollah kidnappings, the U.S. government consultant said, several Israeli officials visited Washington, separately, “to get a green light for the bombing operation and to find out how much the United States would bear.” The consultant added, “Israel began with Cheney. It wanted to be sure that it had his support and the support of his office and the Middle East desk of the National Security Council.” After that, “persuading Bush was never a problem, and Condi Rice was on board,” the consultant said.

The initial plan, as outlined by the Israelis, called for a major bombing campaign in response to the next Hezbollah provocation, according to the Middle East expert with knowledge of U.S. and Israeli thinking. Israel believed that, by targeting Lebanon’s infrastructure, including highways, fuel depots, and even the civilian runways at the main Beirut airport, it could persuade Lebanon’s large Christian and Sunni populations to turn against Hezbollah, according to the former senior intelligence official. The airport, highways, and bridges, among other things, have been hit in the bombing campaign. The Israeli Air Force had flown almost nine thousand missions as of last week. (David Siegel, the Israeli spokesman, said that Israel had targeted only sites connected to Hezbollah; the bombing of bridges and roads was meant to prevent the transport of weapons.)

The Israeli plan, according to the former senior intelligence official, was “the mirror image of what the United States has been planning for Iran.” (The initial U.S. Air Force proposals for an air attack to destroy Iran’s nuclear capacity, which included the option of intense bombing of civilian infrastructure targets inside Iran, have been resisted by the top leadership of the Army, the Navy, and the Marine Corps, according to current and former officials. They argue that the Air Force plan will not work and will inevitably lead, as in the Israeli war with Hezbollah, to the insertion of troops on the ground.)

Later in the article the relation of the Israel venture to Iran planning in the minds of U.S. war dogs is made clear.

Cheney’s office supported the Israeli plan, as did Elliott Abrams, a deputy national-security adviser, according to several former and current officials. (A spokesman for the N.S.C. denied that Abrams had done so.) They believed that Israel should move quickly in its air war against Hezbollah. A former intelligence officer said, “We told Israel, ‘Look, if you guys have to go, we’re behind you all the way. But we think it should be sooner rather than later—the longer you wait, the less time we have to evaluate and plan for Iran before Bush gets out of office.’ ”

Of course the unexpected is always, er, unexpected …

The surprising strength of Hezbollah’s resistance, and its continuing ability to fire rockets into northern Israel in the face of the constant Israeli bombing, the Middle East expert told me, “is a massive setback for those in the White House who want to use force in Iran. And those who argue that the bombing will create internal dissent and revolt in Iran are also set back.”

Whether the surprise is due to piss-poor intelligence — where are the underground facilities? how did 10,000 rockets get into the area and where are they? — or due to a failure to understand the simplest rules of human combat: don’t count on the cowardice of your enemy, will be looked at down the line.

In the soul searching and armaments inventorying voices from armageddonists such as Tashbih Sayed will enter the fray, voices loud and certain, raising the fear at every level with assertions as to what Muslims think, showing the long history of their perfidy and calling somehow — it seems to me — for an unthinkable (let’s not call it a final) solution.

The latest flare-up in a 59 years long war to wipe the Jewish state off the map of the world is fast approaching its expected closure. Israel is once again being forced to leave the job of eliminating the Islamist threat unfinished. The world’s powers, blinded by their anti-Semitism, politico-commercial considerations, and regional agendas, want Israel to stop pursuing its legitimate campaign to secure itself by eradicating the Islamist threat from its door steps: they want an immediate cease-fire.

They are not ready to accept that in case of political Islam, cease-fires are nothing but tactical pauses which are used as tools to gain time in order to recoup losses, re-arm forces, and rebuild terrorist infrastructure

The Cease Fire, in Pakistan Today

Meanwhile, ceasefire or not, all sides are preparing not for peace but for the next round. Without understanding the elemental particles of human behavior — identity, belonging, fear, agression, loyalty, justice, vengefulness, dignity, hope — progress in slowing the impetus towards critical mass will be nil.

Update: For more commentary on the Hersh article go to billmon at Whiskey Bar.

Authoritarians In the Family

Saturday, August 12th, 2006

I am always left uneasy by those who point at the president, or his boss Mr. Cheney, or any particular set of his minions as the reason and sole reason for all our troubles. True, they consitute a particularly noxious stew of hubris, stupidity, agression and greed. But, as we used to say about Richard Nixon, take away his army and he’s just a lunatic shouting on a street corner.

What really troubles me, and where I think most of us can have the greatest effect, is the 50% or so who voted for him (even though 50% of those are now denying it.) What is going on here?

John Dean, the infamous Nixonite, is more than making up for his transgessions in my book. His latest effort in Conservatives Without Conscience resucitates some very important research done on the authoritarian personality following WW II which has been mostly lost to the minds of men. I had the good fortune to read, and still dip into, the two volume set of The Authoritarian Personality by T.W. Adorno at al, published in 1964 by Wiley & Sons. This study was a major contribution to a series called Studies in Prejudice sponsored by the American Jewish Committee. Dean also uses more recent work based on the research of Dr. Robert Altemeyer of the University of Manitoba, a social psychologist specializing in the psychology of authoritarianism, who I hadn’t known about until this Orcinus blog posting on Dean’s book.

Within the genera of Authoritarian personalities there are at least two species: Leaders and Followers. Followers — who we compete for social space with — have the following principal characteristics:

1. Submission to authority. “These people accept almost without question the statements and actions of established authorities, and comply with such instructions without further ado” writes Dean. “[They] are intolerant of criticism of their authorities, because they believe the authority is unassailably correct. Rather than feeling vulnerable in the presence of powerful authorities, they feel safer…

2. Aggressive support of authority. Right-wing followers do not hesitate to inflict physical, psychological, financial, social, or other forms of harm on those they see as threatening the legitimacy of their belief system and their chosen authority figure. This includes anyone they see as being too different from their norm (like gays or racial minorities). It’s also what drives their extremely punitive attitude toward discipline and justice…

3. Conventionality. Right-wing authoritarian followers prefer to see the world in stark black-and-white. They conform closely with the rules defined for them by their authorities, and do not stray far from their own communities.

I won’t suggest you dig into the sources of all this — but please let me know if you do! Absorbing the Orcinus posting, and Conservatives Without Conscience would be extremely worthwhile as, election excitement notwhithstanding, we have miles to go before we sleep.

Israel: Second Guessing

Friday, August 11th, 2006

Israelis learned faster than their American cousins that invasion cheerleading is different from critical and difficult thought.

After enjoying four weeks of unwavering public support, Mr Olmert’s Government woke up to an unprecedented barrage of criticism today for its handling of the war in Lebanon. One headline in the Haaretz newspaper declared: “Olmert must go”


Olmert comes under fire for Lebanon failures

Olmert must swallow his pride, adopt UN resolution

Israel, the Middle East and the World are in a set of overlapping serious situations. Like watching the slow drip drip of glaciers in Greenland and the Antartic and knowing a catastrophe is coming, so we hear the increasing volume of all the players in the war zones, from Nashrallah to Olmert to Bush to Blair, we know of the increasing shipments of arms, we hear the increasing lamantations for OUR dead and dismissal of the deaths of the-criminals-over-there, we know that stench is being wrapped in the leaves of righteousness, that the Good Book is being intoned with all the blood glittering phrases and know, as with the melting ice, that humans could stop all this. We know from looking at the past that those once tearing out each others throats are now allies and friends, trading partners, tourists in old war zones. It seems possible that we could skip the children’s limbs being tossed into the jaws of stupidity in payment for today’s reconciliation.

Hamburg 1943

Wednesday, August 9th, 2006

Firestorm in Hamburg 1943

In July of 1943 British bombers conducted massive bombing raids, day and night, on the city of Hamburg.

Those who were known to have experienced unimaginably frightful hours, who had run through fire with their clothes burning, stumbling over charred corpses; before whose eyes and in whose arms children had suffocated; who had seen their houses collapsing right after their father or husband had gone back inside to save something or other; all those who had spent months hoping for news of the missing and who at the very least had lost all their posssessions in the matter of minutes — why didn’t they cry and lament? And why this indifferent tone of voice when they spoke of what they had left behind, this dispassionate manner of talking, as if telling of a terrible event of prehistoric time that would be impossible today, that is almost forgotten except for the shockwaves that still faintly agitate our dreams? This muffled voice, impervious to daylight and so timid, the way one speaks at night, outside, when one doesn’t know where there might be an ear secretly listening.

Hans Erich Nossack, The End, Hamburg 1943, translated by Joel Agee

For more photos by Erich Andres, go here.

Environment: Mother Ocean

Saturday, August 5th, 2006
Sewege into the Ocean

You think you felt bad with the barfing flu that was going around this spring? Friends of mine were laid up for two weeks. Well the LA Times has a bang up series on a real sickness: ocean sickness. Besides the obvious yuckiness of slimes, jelly fish and tufts of hairy growth which reasonable people would like to see cleaned up, besides the mass deaths of fish that hungry people would otherwise eat, there is one, major, huge, stupendous reason why the sickening seas matter: the Oceans, far more than trees and green plants on terra-firma, are the CO2 sinks we need to slowdown, and reverse Earth Fever. You can plant all the trees you want to balance your automobile emissions but if the human race is to return the atmospheric CO2 burden back to an equilibrium state the oceans are the only player. Phytoplankton absorption of CO2 back in the day is what brought the early earth out of the superheated supertoxic ball it was into the livable zone for Adam, his zoo and garden. As we burn those phytoplankton, long gone to oil, we release the absorbed C02 and away it goes, up up and unfortunately not away but to self organize into an invisible, heat trapping ceiling. Before you know it 100 degree days become 100 degree weeks, tropical storms, sucking up the hotter ocean energy, become hurricanes with iron tips in their lash… So we need our oceans more than anything else that can be mentioned.
A Primeval Tide of Toxins

In another proof that it likes to stay just behind the curve, the EPA “said on Thursday that it was recommending new restrictions on thousands of uses of pesticides because of their adverse effects on public health.” Well good. Late, but good. [There is going to be soooo much work to do when the real EPA gets to work following the election of a tough, bright, unafraid Democrat in 2008...] Pesticide cut-back is good. Nitrogen run-off diminishment is better; nitrogen from fertilizers running off into the oceans has caused some 150 “dead zones” around the world. [See above story.]
E.P.A. Recommends Limits on Thousands of Uses of Pesticides

Now, if the slime doesn’t goop up the works there are interesting new initiatives to convert ocean energy into humanly useable energy. This one is capital intensive but has some interested investors and live tests. Check it out Energy from the Restless Sea