God Save the Queen, and the Prince, and Camilla, and British Democracy.

I've never met a protest I don't like (obviously I don't actually mean this), but whoa there Brits, hold your horses. What am I talking about? The English have broken a long streak about getting involved in politics only as regards animal rights to attack a car holding Prince Charles and his wife, Camilla Parker-Bowles (nb, the NYT just called her Camilla, probably because they don't know what her new last name is since she married the Prince of England) because the government just voted to raise the maximum university tuition from something like £3300 to £9000, or about $16,000. So substantively, I agree with the protesters - almost tripling tuition is a bad move, even when making more generous loan repayment packages (Brits only have to pay back their loans when they make more than a certain income, and only up to a certain percentage of that income). Strategywise, though, I am less than impressed. Your democratically elected government chose to raise fees for higher education - this is a change of degree, not of ideology. I am not sure exactly which policy decisions in a democratic (or whatever they have in Great Britain) government calls for violent protest, but surely raising fees does not qualify? They should reread the Magna Carta or something.

Over even greater concern is the choice of targets. The New York Times article doesn't mention it, but it is possible that the protesters didn't know who was in the car. This view is supported by the fact that the protesters yelled "Tory scum!' while throwing rocks and paint at the car, and apparently ripping the door off the Jag (!) following behind with security. It seems to be terribly bizarre that a mob would attack a car which coincidentally holds the second in line to the throne. The other, and perhaps more likely seeming option is that of course they knew who was in the car. Why then, anyone would accuse Prince Charles of being Tory scum is beyond me. The Tory party is tied to 'old money,' and what is left of the aristocracy in the British mind, and also in reality. The royal family, though, takes care to stay out of politics and policy. The monarchy itself is a controversial subject in Great Britain, but that doesn't seem to have been the subject of the protests, unless it was and I just don't get it.

The problem boils down to: it is probably best to target policy makers in protesters like this. Either the protesters targeted the Prince, who doesn't vote, never mind about make policy, or they were targeting a random person in a nice car. I can't believe how reactionary I sound.

More wikileaks

Wikileaks again.
This is the best article I have read about the Wikileaks, and better than anything I could write, so I'll leave it all that.

Thoughts on the Shitshow

I really wanted to dig up some super huge scandal from the wikileaks, or at least be able to make some well founded predictions for the state of the US's place in the world in the coming decade. These leaks though - jeez - either the State Department was forceful in demanding the NY Times not print anything interesting or (more likely) the State Department is somewhat clueless. Not totally clueless, but about as clueless at a sophomore writing a paper about foreign relations or IR. The Arab countries don't want Iran to have the bomb? Really? Putin has a lot of power in Russia?? Really??? Mugabe is smart, but also totally psycho??? Those questions marks were supposed to denote heavy sarcasm. Don't get me wrong, obviously this stuff is interesting, and I will read all of them because I am a dork (not all 250,000 of them. All of the ones the NYT puts on the web - I'm not that much of a dork), but it is more History Channel than Woodward and Bernstein (who was married to Nora Ephron!).

Also, I'm really curious about the guy who originally downloaded these documents. Don't get me wrong, I don't really have a problem with what wikileaks or the New York Times has done (although I don't think it'd be totally repressive and crazy for the government to take them to court), but I am a little unclear about the original leaker's motives. Does he believe that people working for the State Department abroad don't, in fact, have the right or need to communicate privately with their employer? Does he believe that citizens have the right to know every secret of the government? Or does he believe that these documents will expose some specific failure of the government that is so terrible that the public has a right to know? 

Anyways, awesome. I am glad I am not in college now, because I'll but I would have ended up trying to write a paper that would have involved reading all 250,000 documents. 

Surprise surprise

Surprise, surprise, it is controversial that the UN is holding a philosophy conference in Iran. The argument seems to be that Iranian academics will not be free to express their opinions at this conference, and others are refusing to go in solidarity. Cheeps of "boycott boycott' echo in the wilderness.

I think Brian Klug, Oxford philosophy professor has it right when he advocates going to the conference in solidarity with Iranian academics, and says "Let the government of Iran be the one that does the boycotting” by “withdrawing invitations or forbidding would-be participants from participating.”Academic boycotts, I think, are counterproductive.

I however, would not have planned this conference in Iran. Why? I think academic boycotts, as a punishment for human rights violating countries, are a way for self satisfied academics to express their moral superiority. On the other hand, the planners of the conference have an obligation to make sure attendees are safe by, for instance, not planning a conference in a country where academics and students are jailed and put to death for spurious reasons. I am not really sure about this though. Hm.

Wind Energy/ Poetic Synergy

This is a not super fascinating article in the New York Times about how people living near wind farms are complaining about noise from the turbines.

This is the amazing last paragraph of the article, a quote from one of these complainers:

"I remember the sound of silence so palpable, so merciless in its depths, that you could almost feel your heart stop in sympathy,” she said. “Now we are prisoners of sonic effluence. I grieve for the past."

Obama's Statement of Faith

It makes me uncomfortable that President Obama feels he has to explain why he became a Christian. That said, his answer is the answer which least alienates me, and which is essentially the only agnostic or humanistic answer to that kind of question. "I am a Christian because I think Christianity teaches great things about how to teach others and I want to behave like a Christian" (I paraphrase) is not an answer which will necessarily placate religious Christians who doubt his religious sincerity, and in fact is a pretty Jewish kinda of answer, or would be Jewish if he mentioned liking the food.

Athiest Jewish Mormons... Hollllla

If you are like me, you read this article about the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life Survey, and really wanted to know what the questions were that us Jewish atheists (and the Mormons) did so well on. Anyways, here they are: (NB the survey doesn't include the answers, so the answers are whatever I think is correct. Unless you are a Jewish Mormon Atheist, chances are I got more right than you, but I could still be mistaken.).

1. When does the Jewish Sabbath begin?  Does it begin on Friday, Saturday, Sunday?

2. Is Ramadan: The Hindu festival of lights? A Jewish day? of atonement? The Islamic holy month?

3. Do you happen to know which of these is the king of gods in ancient Greek mythology? Zeus? Mars? Apollo?

4. Do you happen to know the name of the holy book of Islam? What is it?

5. Which of these religions aims at nirvana, the state of being free from suffering? Islam? Buddhism? Hinduism?

6. In which religion are Vishnu and Shiva central figures? Islam? Hinduism? Taoism?

7. Is an athist someone who believes in God, someone who does NOT believe in God, or someone who is unsure whether God exists? And is an agnostic someone who believes in God, someone who does NOT believe in God, or someone who is unsure whether God exists?


8. What is the first book of the Bible?

9. Will you tell me the names of the first four books of the New Testament of the Bible, that is the Four Gospels?

10. Where, according to the Bible, was Jesus born? Jericho? Bethlehem? Jerusalem? Nazareth?

11. When was the Mormon religion founded? Before the year 1200 A.D.? Between 1200 and 1800? Sometime after 1800?

12. The Book of Mormon tells the story of Jesus Christ appearing to people in what area of the world? The Americas? The Middle East? Asia?

13. Which of the following best describes Catholic teaching about the bread and wine used for Communion?  The bread and wine actually become the body and blood of Jesus Christ? The bread and wine are symbols of the body and blood?





14. Which of these religious groups traditionally teaches that salvation comes through faith alone? Only Protestants? Only Catholics? Both? Neither?

15. Please tell me which of the following is NOT one of the Ten Commandments? Do not commit adultery? Do unto others as you would have them do unto you? Do not steal? Keep the Sabbath holy? All are in the Ten Commandments?

16. Which Bible figure is most closely associated with  remaining obedient to God despite suffering? Job? Elijah? Moses? Abraham?

17. Which Bible figure is most closely associated with leading the exodus from Egypt? Job? Elijah? Moses? Abraham?



18. Which Bible figure is most closely associated with willingness to sacrifice his son for God? Job? Elijah? Moses? Abraham?

19. Would you tell me if Mother Teresa was Catholic? Jewish? Buddhist? Mormon? Hindu?

20. Would you tell me if the Dalai Lama is Catholic? Jewish? Buddhist? Mormon? Hindu?

21. Would you tell me if Joseph Smith was Catholic? Jewish? Buddhist? Mormon? Hindu?

22. Would you tell me if Maimonides was Catholic? Jewish? Buddhist? Mormon? Hindu?

23. Which of the following statements best describes what the U.S. Constitution says about religion? Christianity should  be given special  emphasis by the  government? The government shall neither establish a religion  nor interfere with the  practice of religion? The Constitution does not say anything one  way or the other about religion?

24. According to rulings by the U.S. Supreme Court, is a public school teacher permitted to lead a class in prayer?

25. According to rulings by the U.S. Supreme Court, is a public school teacher permitted to read from the Bible as an example of literature?

26. According to rulings by the U.S. Supreme Court, is a public school teacher permitted tooffer a class comparing the world's religions?

27. Do you happen to know what religion most people in India consider themselves?

28. Do you happen to know what religion most people in Indonesia consider themselves? 

29. Do you happen to know what religion most people in Pakistan consider themselves?

30. What was the name of the person whose writings and actions inspired the Protestant Reformation? Martin Luther? Thomas Aquinas? John Wesley?


31. Which of these people developed the theory of evolution by natural selection? Sigmund Freud? Charles Darwin? Clarence Darrow?






32. And which of these court trials focused on whether evolution could be taught in public schools? The Salem witch trials? Brown vs. Board of Education? The Scopes trial?

33. Which one of these preachers participated in the period of religious activity known as the First Great
Awakening? Jonathan Edwards? Charles Finney? Billy Graham?

1. Friday 2. Islamic Holy Month 3. Zeus 4. Koran 5. Buddhism 6. Hinduism 7. Does not beleive, isn't sure 8. Genesis or Bereshit 9. Matthew, Mark Luke and John 10. Bethlehem 11. After 1800 12. The Americas 13. Actually become body and blood of Christ. 14. Protestants 15. Do unto others 16. Job 17. Moses 18. Abraham 19. Catholic 20. Buddhist 21. Mormon 22. Jewish 23. Neither establish nor interfere 24. No 25. Yes 26. Yes 27. Hindu 28. Muslim 29. Muslim 30. Martin Luther 31. Charles Darwin 32. The Scopes Trial 33. Jonathan Edwards

Lumpy Mattress? Just Stir it, Una.

Ha ha ha, ha ha ha hahahahaha. Some fancy company made a $50,000 mattress, a New York Times reporter reviews it and can't sleep because he finds it lumpy. You could dream about publicity this bad.

Now This Is Tied for the Worst Idea Ever

I recently claimed that creating public schools based on video gaming is the worst idea ever. I take it back. It is tied for worst idea ever with standing room only seats in airplanes.

People: just because someone will be something, doesn't mean you should sell it to them.

The New York Times On Jews' most ubiquitous and tangible contribution to New York

"Jews have left their mark on every aspect of New York life, but perhaps none so ubiquitous and tangible as the palm-length encasements attached to countless doorways."

Incorrect. See: Bagels, the garment industry, the movie industry, crosses (Jesus was a Jew. No Jews, no crucifix), CUNY...

Don't Go there, Ratzy.

Word on the street is that some Jewish people are really offended that the Pope compared atheism to Nazism... pretty much.

Even if he didn't really actually compare them, I think he shouldn't have gone there, really. Maybe he's like Tinkerbell and if people stop believing, he disappears.

Unimpressed again, Gray Lady

Wow, Gray Lady, budget cuts much? Hire your own travel journalists, sheesh.

Bruni Goes Down a Dangerous Path

We, or mostly my roommate tried this a while ago, and let me tell you Bruni makes infusing things into vodka sound easy. We put something - I believe ginger -  in the vodka, let it sit for a few weeks, and when we opened the vodka, found a massive THING, a sort of living breathing creature, almost with arms and legs, as if the THING had grown mold, and which then had children and grandchildren and became sentient. It put me off vodka for a year. So be warned.

Good Use of an Emergency Exit Slide

Flight attendant curses at passengers, opens emergency exit and slides down chute to escape plane. I 100% support this man, and hope he is my flight attendant in the future (seems more likely he is headed for a career change).

On finding natural resources in Afghanistan...

What he said.

Seriously, I read this and was just so not thrilled, and also not able to think anything beyond the obvious that I just didn't process it, but now someone else did it better and I don't have to.

Oy. 

Advice for the US Army in Afghanistan and Babies!

This reminded me of this strange strange article about woman marines in Afghanistan. The article kind of weirded me out, although I couldn't figure out why - certainly once American armed forces are in Afghanistan (which they are, my own college day protests notwithstanding), it is much better to have troops who can talk to the 50% of the population who happen not to be guys. Even the fact that the women's commander describes the female soldiers' interaction with Afghan women as “a normal, girls-just-hanging-out type of conversation, giggling and everything,” wasn't what made me go 'hmm,' although it certainly is a suspect statement, and doesn't really say much for his respect for his comrades' abilities and professionalism.
Really, it is the idea that the women could make children comfortable in a way that men couldn't that got me thinking. We learn that

Afghans have been more receptive when his patrols included the female Marines, who hand out stuffed animals to village children. When male Marines try that, he said, “It’s just a bunch of guys with rockets and machine guns trying to hand out a bear to a kid, and he starts to cry.”

I don't doubt their word that this is true, that the female soldiers can connect with Afghan kids easier than male soldiers can. But why??? Even if I believe that women are, for either biological or social reasons, more nurturing than men are, I don't know how female soldiers, presumably the toughest and even most emotionally manlike of the XX chromosomed set, fit into this. And if the argument is that kids feel more comfortable with women no matter how nurturing or not they may be, well, I am guessing these kids are pretty equally freaked out by men and women in uniforms with guns. This kids also are not used to seeing uncovered women in public places at all, or in pants - probably many of the youngest kinds can't tell whether the people in green giving them candy are men or women at all.

My unconfirmable guess for now is that the male and female soldiers felt the same genuine desire to make a personal connection with Afghan kids, and maybe even have the same level of 'nurturingness' and 'scariness' to the kids, but that the women were more willing to and have more practice in faking it for kids, making themself seem accessible - you know, to get down to eye level with the kids, to speak in a 'kiddy' voice, make faces, coo at babies. Male soldiers may have just had a discomfort, or lack of practice in doing that, whereas maybe that is something most women learn to do in their childhood and teenage years. This is assuming Afghan children respond to the same cues as American children, which I imagine for the most part they do.

So why does the Babies! movie remind me of that? You know, nurturingness, the universality of child development and communications, cooing at babies - that's what I was getting at.
Anyways, not that I am in the business of giving the military advice, but maybe it is exactly this kind of knowledge of foreign cultures (and languages) which would have been beneficial 9 years ago. Just saying.

They should ask me to plan their shindigs...

Obamas, Mexican food and Beyonce isn't a state dinner, its a Sunday night. HTH.

They go together like peanutbutter and chocolate...

Amazing article in the Times. It is about smoking pot and eating great greasy food, probably in San Francisco. I know my readers, and I know you will enjoy this.

Bad for the Jews

The New York Times Book Review Section this week has a theme. This theme is "The Jewish Question." I'm going to go out there and say "bad for the Jews." First of all, getting a whole week out of 52 weeks of the book review - not just about Jews, but specifically about anti-semitism? Thanks but no thanks. Second of all - calling it the Jewish Question? Really? The Jewish Questions was basically "how can we allow this people to live among us but be separate?" and the answer was, you know, the final solution, so these are not value neutral terms. It is sort of like writing a section about racism in the last twenty years and calling it 'Welfare Queens,' or one about immigration "Fence Jumpers" or something. Humph

The Next Conservative Revolution is Coming to you from the NYT Op-Ed Page

I wrote a whole long and ranty post about how the NYT's op-ed page has in the past two days sported columns from liberals' favorite and least favorite conservatives, and how the arguments are related, and how they are trying to tear down the consensus that it takes more work than grit and a family emphasis on education to achieve something these days. Anyways, it was too long and too ranty, even for me, so I deleted it. Discretion is the better part of valor, or something. I have, like, opinions, though and why have a blog if you can't share opinions, so for anyone who is interested in what I didn't like about David Brook's article about the limits of policy, and Charles Murray's article about charter schools, here are some bullet points (that will only make sense if you read the articles, and in the case of Murray, are somewhat familiar with his Magnum Crapuses:

Brooks

•  I'll bet someone living in poverty in Sweden has quite a bit higher quality of life than someone living in poverty in the US, even if it (only?) gives them 2.7 more years of expected life.
• How how HOW does comparing native Americans in South Dakota and Indians in New Jersey prove your point that culture not policy matters? Is availability of quality schools and jobs not a policy thing? Also, isn't the fact that the Native Americans are in South Dakota and not New Jersey to begin with a policy thing (that would be the Indian Removal Act, I believe)?
• Isn't the fact that high achieving people tend to live close to each other (in big cities on the coasts) and produce 'positive feedback loops' a reflection of how they vote and their budgeting priorities? Isn't that policy?
• I haven't read Susan Mayer's book, but most social policies don''t try to double anyone's money, they try to improve economic opportunities for those at the bottom, and provide a safety net for everyone else. Tax and spend liberals assume that everyone, not just poor people, won't use their money as well as the government would, and so prefer to spend it on social programs.
• Cool, your policy recommendation of supporting strong social ties but not uprooting people sounds reasonable. Oh, wait, what is your example of that? The army? Because vet's do so well in America today?
• And great preschools! Here we agree! But in the name of strengthening social bonds? Don't great preschools allow mothers to go to work, which, I don't know, might not strengthen social ties? Basically, huh?

Murray

• Unrelated to this article, but nice job going against everything you had ever written and arguing for the abolition of the SAT. Not a nice job with everything else you've ever written. Thanks for creating the racist and harmful meme of the 'welfare queen.' Don't even ask me to talk about The Bell Curve.
• This isn't as complicated. Mr Murray, you are basically arguing that you want to send your children to schools with children who come from families who share your social values. I don't want to claim that this is a code for race and class, but I am going to claim just that. Neighborhood public schools don't allow you to protect your children from the influences of those who - shock - are different! Would choose a multicultural or progressive curriculum over one that emphasizes the late and greats. I don't know dude, I think that's sketchy.

It is when I explain what these articles have to do with eachother that this gets way too ranty, so I'm going to leave it at that.