ahistoricality

Low class is better than no class at all....

2012-01-27T23:05:00.000-05:00

For fun, I did the "What Class Of White Are You" test Charles Murray's hawking. I won't link to it, but I'll link to commentaries here and here and here. The fun part is trying to guess what point he's making with each question, and then reading the scoring guide and realizing just how weird his internal cultural map is. As I pointed out at LGM, " By his own admission, backed up with statistics, most of what scores you points on this test are minority experiences, in some cases quite narrow ones (Military service. Who the hell identifies race car drivers by sight? Branson? And what’s the socioeconomic profile of people who made Inception a top-grossing film?)."

So, how did I do?

1. 5
2. 0
3. 6 (but working at a college in a small town shouldn't count, right?)
4. 0 (what do you mean, "Graduate school doesn't count"?)
5. 0
6. 0 (what do you mean "Carpal Tunnel doesn't count"?)
7. 0 (I had a friend who was a Monarchist: that ought to count for something)
8. 0
9. 4
10. 0
11. 1
12. 0
13. 0
14. 2, but only because I had guests coming who drink the stuff
15. 1
16. 3
17. 0
18. 2
19. 2
20. 0
21. 1
22. 0
23. 1
24. 0
25. 4

Total: 32

"A ﬁrst-generation upper-middle-class person with middle-class parents.
Range: 11–80.
Typical: 33."

Am I "upper-middle-class"? Not by income, but I certainly fall into the overeducated liberal elite category he's trying to guilt-trip into voting culture-war Republican (though anyone with a real interest in improving the lives of lower-class working folk wouldn't). To be honest, lots of my points come from having married into a family with rather different tastes and having lived where I needed to live to pursue an academic (though not an elite) career.

Does this suggest that I need to rethink my understanding of American society? No: the logical leaps and cultural blinkers and statistical junk pseudo-science is strong with this one....

Comment Elsewhere: Amateur Opinions Matter

2012-01-10T12:54:00.000-05:00

In a discussion of a particularly blatant bit of retrograde elitism, I noted:

Law, like history, is a field where amateur opinions not only are common, but matter a great deal: they define the discourse in ways that professionals must adjust to.

This is something that the professional historical community has been grappling with for as long as I've been part of it: public history, historical memory, historical mythologies all are part of the public discourse which greatly affects the wider understanding of our work.

Picture: Web

2012-01-03T23:12:00.000-05:00

Picture: Common Fly

2011-12-28T23:10:00.000-05:00

Picture: Dragonfly In Flight

2011-12-18T22:46:00.000-05:00

Remember Summer?

Picture: Fuzzy Moth

2011-12-11T22:50:00.000-05:00

Picture: Wasp On Water

2011-12-06T22:55:00.000-05:00

Picture: What Flavor Santa?

2011-12-01T00:57:00.000-05:00

Not an entirely successful panorama merge, but you can, at least, see all the flavors of Santa: (from left) Sampler, Maple Cream, King Size Marshmallow, Marshmallow, Milk Chocolate Marshmallow, Caramel, Strawberry Cream, Peanut Butter, Dark Chocolate Coconut Cream, Coconut, Sugar Free Marshmallow, Sugar Free Coconut.

Picture: Worm on Corn

2011-11-06T00:09:00.000-05:00

Not all harvests are happy harvests....

Picture: Supermarket Cricket

2011-10-26T00:08:00.000-05:00

Picture: Mushroom And Sky

2011-10-16T20:30:00.000-05:00

Picture: Rope Coil

2011-10-06T20:45:00.000-05:00

Picture: Bunny With Blazing Eye

2011-10-01T23:05:00.000-05:00

Picture: Broken Egg

2011-09-26T20:43:00.001-05:00

Picture: Psychological Self-Portrait

2011-09-21T23:01:00.000-05:00

Sometimes You're the Bug.

Picture: Translucent House Spider

2011-09-16T20:40:00.000-05:00

Picture: Things I Notice

2011-09-12T22:57:00.000-05:00

Picture: Field of Fallen Flowers

2011-09-06T20:37:00.000-05:00

Picture: Unnatural Flower

2011-08-26T20:35:00.000-05:00

Picture: Startling Sunburst

2011-08-16T20:33:00.000-05:00

Picture: Gum on Bannister

2011-08-06T00:05:00.001-05:00

And people wonder why faculty dread the end of summer....

Picture: Snail, sorta

2011-07-26T20:27:00.000-05:00

How did a ceramic snail get into my yard?

Comment Elsewhere: Pathology and Mass Murder

2011-07-23T12:43:00.003-05:00

Yeah, it's a discussion of the Oslo/Utoya killings, so forewarned. Some yahoo claimed that only the psychologically abnormal kill, which is just weird:

Apparently sociopathic behavior can be the result of extreme conditions rather than an underlying mental condition: which is to say, just because he did something which defies normal rational moral explanation doesn’t mean that he’s insane in any meaningful way. He thinks he’s at war, fighting for the life of himself, his race, and he’s willing to do what it takes to win. He’s not insane. He’s not a “madman” or somehow unaccountable for his actions. He’s a political actor who made a tactical decision in what he believes is a time of crisis.

And he should be required to watch a continuous loop of home movies and tributes of his victims in a jail cell from now until the end of his natural life.

Picture: Ants and Egg

2011-07-16T20:25:00.001-05:00

Picture: Tattered Flag

2011-05-30T01:11:00.001-05:00

Picture: Boiling Bubbles

2011-05-22T16:24:00.000-05:00

Picture: Enchilada Casserole

2011-05-14T16:23:00.000-05:00

Picture: Slow Exposure Hearth

2011-05-07T16:22:00.000-05:00

Picture: Quiche

2011-05-01T16:21:00.000-05:00

Comments Elsewhere: Birtherism and the Ground Game

2011-04-27T21:58:00.002-05:00

After watching 80-odd comments on the birth certificate issues miss the point, I added

There’s a whole raft of birther-related bills floating around statehouses, targetting the next round of primaries and national elections: filing season is going to come up in a matter of months. Releasing these documents now is a reminder to every state attorney general, every state legislature that they will mire their state in costly legislation, and if they craft a bill that excludes Obama’s documentation, they’ll be in violation of constitutional due process and full faith and credit protections, and if they don’t, they’ll just look like idiots for missing their target.

Frankly, the short-form birth certificate was enough, legally, but this just drives it home.

Probably won’t stop them from trying, but it could peel away enough cost-conscious state senators or governors to keep the legislation sane and/or kill it outright.

Picture: Fuzzy Fungus

2011-04-23T16:20:00.000-05:00

Picture: Drummer Jokes: Sometimes they just write themselves

2011-04-17T16:17:00.000-05:00

That was a Long Eight Years....

2011-04-10T11:42:00.003-05:00

Someone has put together the most comprehensive collection of Bush administration scandals, errors and atrocities. My Impeachment Index pales by comparison.

Most corrupt ever, or just since Harding? Or maybe since Andrew Johnson? I'm voting for "ever" but the modern state offers so many more opportunities and they didn't miss one.

Picture: Tufted Titmouse

2011-04-09T21:29:00.000-05:00

Picture: Paralyzed With Fear

2011-04-02T21:27:00.000-05:00

Picture: Tiny Hopper

2011-03-27T16:20:00.000-05:00

Picture: Free Starbucks Coffee!

2011-03-20T16:18:00.000-05:00

When I first read this, I parsed it wrong. "I didn't know Starbucks was imprisoned or restrained in any way, or that it had become a campus cause...."

Picture: Blazing Sunset

2011-03-15T16:17:00.000-05:00

Picture: Chilis

2011-03-09T16:16:00.000-05:00

Picture: Rice Krispy Treat Butt

2011-03-02T16:13:00.000-05:00

I'm not sure what bothers me more: the image of someone smoking a Rice Krispy Treat, or that the ants found it even though there's usually only tobacco and paper in the ashtray.

Picture: Anticipating Spring #3

2011-02-25T16:04:00.000-05:00

Picture: Anticipating Spring #2

2011-02-16T16:02:00.000-05:00

Picture: Anticipating Spring #1

2011-02-09T16:01:00.000-05:00

Comments Elsewhere: Pseudonym Troubles

2011-02-03T11:16:00.003-05:00

In a discussion of pseudonymous blogging and academic identity, I noted

One thing that hasn't been discussed much as far as I can see is that pseudonymous commenting is harder than it used to be. New comment systems like Disqus which track users - for their convenience, of course - make it impossible to maintain multiple identities without basically wiping cookies between every comment. Similarly, facebook integration apps can reveal your identity if you stay logged in to facebook, even if you intend to comment under the pseudonym. I can't comment on a lot of blogs anymore without revealing my multiple identities.

This pseudonym has never been terribly secure - I wasn't all that good at anonymity when I started - but this has always been an UNprofessional space for me and I want to keep it that way.

Picture: Chorizo Man!

2011-01-31T01:04:00.000-05:00

Comment Elsewhere: McCain on TV on Ethanol

2011-01-23T11:57:00.002-05:00

In response to Steve Benen's reporting on John McCain's latest Sunday News SHow Appearance and flip-flop, I replied:

I like the ongoing count of McCain appearances: it's a fantastic reminder of the vacuity of commercial news and influence peddling.

That said, the science and economics of ethanol - especially corn-based ethanol - has changed over time: I have great respect for politicians who will admit that their policy views have changed based on science and fact. McCain, on the other hand, uses policy positions as levers and bludgeons, and has no actual affinity for reality.

Picture: Racked and Ready

2011-01-22T21:59:00.000-05:00

Comments Elsewhere: Rejecting Parallelism

2011-01-16T21:13:00.003-05:00

In response to Scott Kaufman's post obliterating right-wing complaints about the Tucson memorial, someone wrote that the complainers were stupid. I replied

It’s not intelligence, exactly, that’s the issue. I think it’s the lack of a moral compass or sense of guilt which allows them to use any and all means, including outright falsehoods, against their percieved enemies, and allows them to hypocritically do the same things their percieved enemies did (or vice versa, to accuse their opponents of wrongdoing for things which they themselves did). It’s a sheer instrumentality in which there is nothing but tactics.

They don’t even have an internalized sense of shame anymore, though they can still, at times, be shamed into some restraint if the right leverage is applied.

I realized later, that my comment here was the start of that thought.

At least they still have some shame. They don’t feel guilt anymore, we know that. But if we can still shame them, we have leverage.

Back at LGM, one of the right-wing trolls tried to play the "both sides" gambit.

I’ll admit to having my own political preferences, even some biases, but I’ve spent a long time training to look at evidence rather than guessing or making stuff up. The situation isn’t parallel anymore. The sides aren’t equal, or equivalent. I don’t see how “pox on both houses” can be anything more than a reflexive twitch or defensive crouch.

Picture: Ice Crystal Weed

2011-01-10T21:56:00.000-05:00

Comments Elsewhere: Citizenship and Personhood

2011-01-06T10:46:00.003-05:00

In a discussion of Republican selectivity on Constitutional principles, including a issues of immigration and abortion, I wrote (satirically, just to be clear):

And since the unborn are persons, their being born doesn’t change their personhood, and therefore shouldn’t change their citizenship status. Only people whose parents can prove that the pregancy was conceived on American soil (preferably in a suburb) should be considered citizens.

Curiously, it undercuts the attack on Republicans as hypocritical, because it creates a consistency in their thought that they don't deserve.

Picture: Raptor Over Field

2010-12-30T21:52:00.000-05:00

Picture: Lights in Motion

2010-12-24T21:57:00.000-05:00

A Solstice Picture

2010-12-22T21:48:00.001-05:00

Picture: Come, they told me....

2010-12-01T12:18:00.000-05:00

Seen at a relative's house last Christmas. Does Baby Jesus need an iPod? Really?

Comments Elsewhere: Politics

2010-11-11T23:28:00.003-05:00

It's been a day of heavy political discussion.

In a discussion of the recent elections with Anne Zook, I wrote:

1/6th of the population will reliably vote, and vote Democrat; 1/6th of the population will reliably vote, and vote Republican; 1/6th of the population, the most motivated of the remaining 2/3rds, will show up and vote their outrage, and the winner is determined by whether inconsistent voting Republicans are more outraged than inconsistent voting Democrats in any given cycle.

A lot of research about independent voters has convinced me that they actually constitute a very small share of the population compared to weak-voting Democrats and Republicans who only show up to vote when they're angry. So the "independent voter" in exit polls oscilates from cycle to cycle not because independents are changing their minds, but because different people are showing up.

Then, in response to Rich Puchalsky's declaration of late-blooming anarchism, I responded:

The problem with anarchism, for me, has always been the absurdly optimistic endgame: if we remove all the structures of oppression and power (and we can't tell the difference), we'll all be happy sharing people!

It feels weird, but as a Lockean/Millsian left liberal, I've become a kind of Burkean conservative: Look, we had these systems and traditions and they worked pretty well! Let's not change them too quickly or expect too much from people! Revolutions get out of control! Especially theirs!

More to the point, perhaps, is that I don't see how you solve the problem of scofflaws by abandoning the concept of law: if your ultimate goal is to create a society of decency, I don't see how law can be anything other than an insufficient but necessary condition of its existence.

We're potentially on the verge of a techologically-aided revolution in law and decency: the ability to document, share, and shame systems of power. Or maybe not, because the same systems of surveillance and publication can even more easily be used against us as methods of control, but it seems to me that fact that we're having the debate about Yoo and Bybee now, less than a decade after the crimes were committed, is a step forward from the decades that disclosure and reckoning used to take. Our skill at self-justification is as great as ever, though, so it might not matter as much as I think.

That said, I feel a lot like I'm clinging to something that really won't support us anymore. Puchalsky's right that the big winners in this process are the plutocrats and "the rule of law" has never significantly affected the national security aspects of the state or economy; Zook is right that the political process is a poisoned well surrounded by idiots.

Pictures: Bugs Around Campus

2010-11-03T19:32:00.000-05:00

Pictures: Bugs Around Home

2010-10-23T19:31:00.000-05:00

Pictures: Mushrooms

2010-10-13T19:27:00.000-05:00

Picture: Bird on a wire

2010-10-03T19:25:00.001-05:00

Comment Elsewhere: Threading a Needle

2010-09-24T09:10:00.002-05:00

In a discussion of US college campus representations of the MidEast conflict, I responded to Nadir Jeewa's incisive comment (in italics) with a variation of my own:

As an ethnic Muslim / religious atheist, I still identify with the Palestinian cause, and wouldn't want the issue to disappear completely from campuses. I just don't want to be forced to make a choice between supporting the Gaza blockade in the name of Israeli security (or becoming an anti-Semite), and supporting Hamas in the name of anti-colonialism (or becoming an Islamophobe). But, that's the options I'm given.*

As an agnostic liberal Jew, I still identify with the Palestinian cause, as well as some Israeli security concerns, and I wouldn't want either issue to disappear from our attention until they are no longer problems. Neither Hamas nor the Israeli government is worthy of energetic support at this point. I'm greatly supportive of Palestinian and Israeli people, and sincerely hope that sometime soon they get the leadership and opportunities they deserve and so clearly lack.

Things whose Habitats I Destroyed With My Hedge Trimmer, aka, yes, I still carry my camera while doing yard work. Why would I stop?

2010-09-05T23:44:00.002-05:00

A continuation of last year's photoessay, because I haven't trimmed the hedges since then.

Yes, I took a picture of the wasp that stung me - after treating the sting!

Limerick Elsewhere: Grammar Police

2010-09-02T08:37:00.003-05:00

In response to a limerick-capped discussion of a new round of student-bashing English 'education', I had to respond (I think I got it right: it's in moderation):

We strive to teach students clarity
and sometimes we end up with hilarity
but if they don't learn
from betting that burn
they'll treat us with similar charity.

In other words, if we put our effort into teaching them to write precisely before teaching them to think effectively, they'll view us, quite correctly, as scolds and neurotics.

Quoted: Kant's Categorical Party Imperative

2010-08-24T16:17:00.000-05:00

Brandon Watson summarizes Immanuel Kant's guidelines for a successful dinner party:

(1) The number of guests should follow Chesterfield's rule: no fewer than the Graces (i.e., three), no more than the Muses (i.e., nine).

(2) The dinner party must exist not merely for physical satisfaction but also for social enjoyment. (This is the reason for the bounds on the number of guests.)

(3) Anything indiscreet that is said at the table stays at the table: there is a moral sanctity to the dinner party, and a duty of secrecy, because without the trust made possible by these it is impossible to have enjoyable culture. This is not a mere matter of taste; it is a matter of the fundamental preconditions that allows free exchange of ideas in social interaction.

(4) When the dinner party is a full one, and there is plenty of time, the conversation during the dinner party should go through three stages:

(a) Narration, i.e., exchange of news
(b) Ratiocination, i.e., lively discussion of the diversity in judgment at the table
(c) Jest, i.e., play of wit

Thus the conversation should always begin with raising pertinent and personal material then move into lively discussion until, tired from the hard work of arguing and reasoning, everyone settles down into lighter talk that leads to laughter. According to Kant, with his nineteenth-century German skepticism about how interested a woman could be in heavy intellectual conversation, when women are present the last stage is especially important, so that by being given a chance to respond to teasing they can show their own intellectual merits.

(5) No dinner music whatsoever. Kant regards it as one of the most absurd innovations in his time.

Obviously, liveliness is the key to a successful dinner party. Fortunately, Kant gives us guidelines for that as well:

(6) Choose topics of conversation in which everyone is interested, and always give people the opportunity to add their own topics, if they are appropriate.

(7) Never allow an extended silence. There can be momentary pauses in conversation, but no more.

(8) Do not change the topic unless necessary and especially do not keep jumping from one topic to another. The conversation should flow naturally and exhibit an organic unity of its own. The reason for this is that in a symposium, as in a drama, the mind occupies itself in part by reminiscing over what has previously occurred and tying the various phases together. A conversation that keeps changing topics is as disconcerting as a play that keeps changing topics and themes.

(9) Dogmatism is to be forbidden absolutely, whether it be on the part of the host or on the part of the guests. When people get too serious and insistent, start making jokes to divert them back to play rather than business.

(10) When serious conflicts arive that really and truly cannot be devoted, self-discipline is essential so that passions do not run too hot. Tone is absolutely essential; even if very serious topics are broached, every effort should be exerted to avoid any estrangement of the guests from each other.

We tend to think of Kant as a dry and humorless moralist, but this is actually a very insightful description of social interaction.

Picture: Think Cool Thoughts

2010-08-15T21:57:00.000-05:00

Picture: Glaring Kangaroo

2010-08-10T21:55:00.000-05:00

Picture: One Dead Tree

2010-08-02T21:52:00.000-05:00

Picture: Camel Expression

2010-07-28T21:49:00.000-05:00

I love taking pictures of camels. The faces are just so perfect.

Comment Elsewhere: Pointless Discussions

2010-07-24T15:15:00.002-05:00

Someone claimed that "Hickory Wind" by Gram Parsons was "infintely better" than "Achy Braky Heart" by Billy Ray Cyrus. I responded

Cyrus is a better musician than Parsons, but the whole musical industry has raised technical standards so much, that it’s not obvious until you compare them side by side. And “Achy Braky Heart” is an entirely successful, intentionally funny song. It’s not lyrical poetry (and “Hickory Wind” is so full of faux sentimentalism and forced romanticism that I could barely listen to it once) but it’s a fantastically written and perfectly performed piece. The problem most people have understanding Cyrus’ work (and I’m not a huge fan, honestly, but this kind of stuff drives me buggy) is that they don’t understand that country (like folk music) has a deliberately and broadly humorous side and doesn’t actually take itself as seriously as the authenticity-hounds (or their mindless rejectors) seem to think.

For comparison, here are the two songs: make up your own mind:

Picture: Duck Family

2010-07-22T21:47:00.000-05:00

Comment Elsewhere: Political tribalism

2010-07-22T16:40:00.004-05:00

Kevin Drum was expressing his difficulty with getting into the conservative mindset, and I responded:

But on an emotional level, it just seems nuts. So I wish that I could figure out a way to feel it. To understand it.

It reminds me of the constant sense of embattlement the Jewish community in the US has been dealing with for.... well, most of the 20th century, I suppose. A hostile educational culture, institutional barriers to success, a presumption of cultural wrongness, the assumption that assimilation to the wide culture equates with a loss of principles, the sense of constant existential threat punctuated by episodes of actual existential threat, and the weekly drumbeat of concern/panic/self-criticism in religious life. A response which includes cultural combativeness, mutual aid within the community, attempts to present a unified front to the rest of the world, hypersensitivity to slights and slippery-slope dangers, creation of separate institutions of education, finance, culture, philanthropy. Celebration of infiltration into mainstream culture and institutions, combined with maintenance of parallel separate institutions.

The list goes on and on. What's surprising is the translation of an authentically tribal response to modernity into a political movement which has now transcended politics to be come a culture.

I've been concerned for a long time that the homeschool movement would be the foundation on which a true epistemic split would be created in American life, but perhaps it's Fox News and Liberty University, instead. Or perhaps it's all of a piece, but it isn't going away anytime soon.

Picture: Blue Darters and Friend

2010-07-16T21:44:00.000-05:00

Archaeological Limerick

2010-07-16T19:49:00.002-05:00

In response to a call for a poetic response to the discovery of an old sailing ship under the World Trade Center site, I wrote:

We build on the bones of the past
Small things first, then monuments vast
When things fall apart
we go back to the start
and sometimes dig up an old mast.

Maybe it would work better as haiku....

Picture: Fun Park Duck

2010-07-10T21:41:00.000-05:00

Happy Fourth of July!

2010-07-04T01:00:00.000-05:00

Picture: Fun Park Flora

2010-06-30T21:38:00.000-05:00

Comment Elsewhere: Texas Republican Platform

2010-06-26T15:06:00.003-05:00

A friend suggested that we read the Texas Republican Party Platform [PDF]. Wow. Here's some selected comments from the experience. I skipped over most of the anti-abortion, anti-homosexual stuff because it's been widely reported. It's pretty bad, really. But there's even more odd stuff there.

There's some stuff in there that I kind of like:

The Government shall not, by rule or law, exempt any of its
members from the provisions of such rule or law.

This would mean that police officers would have to justify the use of force based on the same standards as the rest of us, and tasers would be considered assault with a deadly weapon.

We demand elimination of presidential authority to issue executive orders and other mandates lacking congressional approval, as well as repeal of all previous executive orders and mandates.

Oh, wow.

Affirmative action falsely casts those who advocate merit as racist.

If the shoe fits....

We support limiting the definition of eminent domain to exclude seizing private property for public or private economic development or for increased tax revenues.

Yup, capitalism can go too far.

The state should have no power over licensing or training of clergy.

I wasn't aware that any such restriction existed.

the Republican Party of Texas urges local government bodies to determine their own policies regarding religious clubs and meetings on all properties owned by the same without interference.

Didn't they want strict adherence to the Constitution earlier?

Either party in a criminal trial should have a right to inform jurors of their right to determine facts and render a verdict.

Jury nullification, yeah! Especially for prosecutors!

We urge Republican Senate leadership to ensure that a record vote is taken on every judicial nominee.

Ending the judicial filibuster? I'm there!

We support full disclosure of the amounts and sources of any campaign contributions to political candidates, whether contributed by individuals, political action committees, or other entities.

Transparency in politics? Not bad. But congressional Republicans just turned down a chance to do this, so the Texans must be DFHs.

We support repeal of all Motor Voter laws; re–registering voters every four years;

Because too many people just show up and vote!

We urge changing the Election Code date of filing for the March primary from January 2 to the second Monday in January.

Why?

OMG, I'm only on page 5. Time to start skimming....

We support adoption of American English as the official language of Texas and of the United States.

I've taught kids from Texas: this could be good!

We call upon governmental entities to protect all symbols of our American heritage from being altered in any way.

Yeah, like turning the Alamo into a theme park, and American Flag Swimsuits.

We believe that the practice of homosexuality tears at the fabric of society

That sounds painful: I think they're doing it wrong.

Also, they have clauses against both RU-486 and the Morning After Pill. Nobody there, apparently, realized that they were the same thing?

Hmm. They're against gambling, but they're in favor of individual retirement investment accounts -- stock market gambling -- instead of social security.

We support the availability of natural, unprocessed foods, which should be encouraged, and that the right to access raw milk directly from the farmer be protected.

Wouldn't you rather get it from the cow? Oh, the farmer and the cowman will be friends....

We advocate equal educational opportunity for all students and the requirement that children with special needs be educated commensurate with their abilities.

Except for the bit about removing learning disabilities from the ADA....

Here's one for the professors!
We support Texas’ colleges and universities use of the same or substitutable textbooks for ten or more years in order to bring costs to students down and maintain some residual value for used books. We oppose restrictions on use of textbooks for multiple years, such as requiring annual access codes.

Granted, the two-year replacement cycle for textbooks is a bit out of hand, but would you want to use textbooks from 10+ years ago in your field?

Also, later: We support the removal of the system of tenure in Texas state colleges and universities.

I have my doubts about tenure, mind you, but I think they're going to have a problem with contracts....

We urge Congress to repeal government-sponsored programs that deal with early childhood development.

There's something about 'self-sufficient families' earlier: I guess this is part of that.

As a prerequisite, we urge passage of a constitutional amendment
prohibiting imposition of state regulations on private and parochial schools

That's a level of school choice that goes well beyond anything I've ever seen before.

We strongly oppose Juvenile Daytime Curfews.

?

We support the parents’ right to choose, without penalty, which medications are administered to their minor children. We oppose medical clinics on school property except higher education and health care for students without parental consent

Aside from the grammatical hash of the last sentence, how much medical freedom are we talking about here? Also, I'm pretty sure there's no medical care for minors without parental consent already. At least based on the paperwork I've seen.

To help instill lifelong healthy eating habits, we support making only foods of nutritional value available in schools during school hours and served in appropriate serving sizes

So, they can take any medication their parents approve of, but they can't eat junk food.

We pledge our influence toward a return to the original intent of the First Amendment and toward dispelling the myth of separation of church and state.

That'll end well.

We support the individual right to enter into real estate contracts without Government interference or regulations.

You know that's about compacts and restrictions, right?

Child abusers should be severely prosecuted. However, we
oppose actions of social agencies to classify traditional methods of discipline as child abuse. We support enactment of a homicide-by-abuse statute that provides punishment for abusing a child to death without intent of killing.

Ick. What I can't tell from the platform is if "homicide by abuse" should be punished more or less severely than other forms of murder: is it more like involuntary manslaughter, or murder with special circumstances?

They also want to replace all taxation -- income, property, whatever -- with sales taxes, except for internet transactions (at least, I think that's what they mean. They might just be opposing those 'government will tax your email' chain letters, though).

Here's one of my favorites:
We strongly believe that the United States of America must protect and defend its national sovereignty as given in the Constitution to the people and remain free of external control or influence and be governed independently of any foreign power, especially with regard to the formation of the North American Union/Community as proposed by the Council of Foreign Relations (CFR). ... later: We oppose relinquishing United States supremacy to any foreign powers on our soil. We support prohibition of all foreign or international military bases within the United States.

Yes, the Texas Republican Party Platform is written by people who believe chain letters. Later, they oppose one-world government and one-world currency, along with withdrawl from the UN and expulsion of the UN from US territory. On the other hand, they want to reinvigorate NASA's moon program, so it's not all bad!

Recommittment to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, intervention into the MidEast (by declaring Jerusalem the capital of Israel) and Asia (by declaring Taiwan a sovereign nation) that are sure to get us even further into trouble. Gotta love the foundations of their foreign policy: "Our policy is based on God’s biblical promise to bless those who bless Israel and curse those who curse Israel and we further invite other nations
and organizations to enjoy the benefits of that promise."

There's a legislative summary at the end, which is oddly inconsistent with the body of the platform.

Wow.

Picture: Fun Park Flora

2010-06-24T21:35:00.000-05:00

Who goes to an amusement park and takes pictures of flowers? Yeah, me.

Picture: Fountain Spray

2010-06-18T21:32:00.002-05:00

Comment Elsewhere: College Sports Prophecy

2010-06-13T12:05:00.003-05:00

In a discussion of the conference readjustment going on in NCAA football, I predicted that

For every school president that ’sees the light’ and goes against alumni and conventional wisdom to shift funding, there’ll be two whose fundraising office and resume-building impulse will lead them to double-down on the athletic bet.

To be fair, I've known college and university presidents who were academically serious, ethical, farsighted and responsible. Even they had major investments in athletics, and often little control over the athletic departments. I've also known presidents who were fickle, ambitious, self-serving and borderline stupid, and the only thing that kept them from investing more in athletics was ... well, nothing, but the limits of the budget and need to maintain the fig leaf of accreditation.

Picture: Fun Park Fauna

2010-06-12T21:28:00.000-05:00

So, who goes to an amusement park and takes pictures of birds? Yeah, me.

Comment Elsewhere: Our current Catch-22

2010-06-06T00:09:00.003-05:00

Terry noted an attempt by anti-immigrant groups to invoke environmental rhetoric in defense of their racism. I responded:

They tried this tack with the Sierra Club a couple of years back: a bunch of anti-immigrant activists began running for positions on the board, conflating these issues, and came awfully close to having some real influence on environmental activism.
We do have a bit of a catch-22 here: if everyone wants to live like we do, the planet can’t sustain it. Either we have to accept and enforce gross inequality, or we have to accept that our material standard of consumption will decline as the rest of the world becomes more economically successful. These yahoos want to do the former.

Comment Elsewhere: Entitlement Issues

2010-05-02T16:18:00.004-05:00

Terry posted an unintentionally hilarious Fox&Friends disquisition on the evil cultural effects of Mr. Rogers (don't get me wrong; Terry knew how absurd it was) and in the discussion following, asked me

You’re a prof – do you see much of the “I’m entitled to an A” attitude that the article cites? I would guess that a bigger problem with entitlement comes from wealth and class than from educational TV aimed at middle class and poorer kids, but I could be wrong.

My answer, which is necessarily incomplete at this time of the year, was

I think, and this will come as no surprise to you or to anyone who know me, that the causes are multiple and the situation much less dire than they’re making it out to be. I have to think this through more carefully after the grading is done, but here’s a short list of things I think have made a difference: smaller families (i.e., more parental attention/investment in children’s success), the installation of college as an expectation (over a third of students go on to higher education, and the number’s higher if community college is included), the self-esteem movement in education and parenting (including, but not limited to, the idea that “we’re all winners” even when we’re not), social promotion, “fairy tale” stories in which talent is inherent (often discovered more or less full-blown; e.g. American Idol, etc.) rather than accumulated through training (or, if training is required, it’s the honing of innate abilities; e.g. Jedi), the conflation of fame with importance, the quantification of educational achievement (testing, esp. multiple choice testing, combined with teaching to the test) allowing students to pass by doing a bare minumum, marketing which emphasizes style as measure of worth (and style as a talent, but also purchasable), and a pervasive anti-intellectualism (going back a century or more, but intensified in late 20c) in American culture (note: geeks are exempted, but their skills are seen as talents and innate, not gained through practice and education).

It’s also worth saying that there are substantial numbers of students in our schools who are bored by the lack of challenge, and who are willing to work hard and long at things they consider worth doing. There are large numbers of students who accept well-defined standards and well-explained grades without protest (though the connection between grade expectations and teacher evaluations is troubling), unlike the vocal minority who make such an impact on teachers’ time and energy.

In retrospect, I think most people would take issue with my definition of "short list"...

Civilization over yet?

2010-04-24T10:32:00.000-05:00

It's been one year since the Iowa Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage in Iowa. Has civilization crumbled yet? Has Iowa suffered any significant declines or setbacks related to this?

I'm just wondering.

Comment Elsewhere: Moderate Middle Muddle

2010-04-23T13:09:00.002-05:00

In response to a particularly egregious David Brooks false equivalence, I wrote:

The two parties have drifted further to the extremes."

What? The Republican party certainly has eviscerated it's own middle, but the Democratic party has, if anything, expanded its 'big tent' to include even more of the moderate middle muddle to the point where 'extreme' (i.e. liberal and progressive) views are being marginalized.

Tweetle Beetle Paddle Battle references are left as an exercise to the reader.

Comment Elsewhere: The Uncensored Palin

2010-04-21T13:21:00.003-05:00

In a discussion at Acephalous about Sarah Palin's recent speech in Hamilton, Canada, I wrote

...the whole performance really has to be taken in context to be understood. It's a collage of elements picked up in her rise to Governor, the pregnancies, the VP run, the post-election scandals and resignation, the palm-writing incident -- and that says everything to me, that she's still flogging that hand-note schtick as though it were actually funny, as though she'd scored points somehow instead of embarassed herself and her party (R or T, whatever). That speech is the sum total of her experience, politically and personally, without editing or organization (I defy anyone to outline that monstrosity!) except that she is at the center, that she has never been wrong, and that her place in the world is in service to a greater good. Which is why she's not going away.

It's really worth reading the speech. There are a few public and academic figures I've known who seem to defy experience and get worse at public speaking as time goes on. I'm not sure how that happens, but it does.

Picture: Soup, or something like it

2010-04-17T12:23:00.000-05:00

Add protein (or not). Simmer. Add peppers at end.

Quiz: The Only American Emperor

2010-04-11T15:33:00.000-05:00

Which Historical Lunatic Are You?
From the fecund loins of Rum and Monkey. [via]
I first learned of Emperor Norton, as so many of my generation did, through Neil Gaiman's Sandman
The bio offered by the quiz accords quite well with Gaiman's version:

Born in England sometime in the second decade of the nineteenth century, you carved a notable business career, in South Africa and later San Francisco, until an entry into the rice market wiped out your fortune in 1854. After this, you became quite different. The first sign of this came on September 17, 1859, when you expressed your dissatisfaction with the political situation in America by declaring yourself Norton I, Emperor of the USA. You remained as such, unchallenged, for twenty-one years.

Within a month you had decreed the dissolution of Congress. When this was largely ignored, you summoned all interested parties to discuss the matter in a music hall, and then summoned the army to quell the rebellious leaders in Washington. This did not work. Magnanimously, you decreed (eventually) that Congress could remain for the time being. However, you disbanded both major political parties in 1869, as well as instituting a fine of $25 for using the abominable nickname "Frisco" for your home city.

Your days consisted of parading around your domain - the San Francisco streets - in a uniform of royal blue with gold epaulettes. This was set off by a beaver hat and umbrella. You dispensed philosophy and inspected the state of sidewalks and the police with equal aplomb. You were a great ally of the maligned Chinese of the city, and once dispersed a riot by standing between the Chinese and their would-be assailants and reciting the Lord's Prayer quietly, head bowed.

Once arrested, you were swiftly pardoned by the Police Chief with all apologies, after which all policemen were ordered to salute you on the street. Your renown grew. Proprietors of respectable establishments fixed brass plaques to their walls proclaiming your patronage; musical and theatrical performances invariably reserved seats for you and your two dogs. (As an aside, you were a good friend of Mark Twain, who wrote an epitaph for one of your faithful hounds, Bummer.) The Census of 1870 listed your occupation as "Emperor".

The Board of Supervisors of San Francisco, upon noticing the slightly delapidated state of your attire, replaced it at their own expense. You responded graciously by granting a patent of nobility to each member. Your death, collapsing on the street on January 8, 1880, made front page news under the headline "Le Roi est Mort". Aside from what you had on your person, your possessions amounted to a single sovereign, a collection of walking sticks, an old sabre, your correspondence with Queen Victoria and 1,098,235 shares of stock in a worthless gold mine. Your funeral cortege was of 30,000 people and over two miles long.

The burial was marked by a total eclipse of the sun.

Picture: Slug

2010-04-10T12:22:00.000-05:00

Picture: Sad End

2010-04-07T12:20:00.000-05:00

Comment Elsewhere: Freud's Projector

2010-03-30T12:20:00.003-05:00

In a response to a post noting a particularly unhinged bit of public paranoia, I wrote

Some people really need to apply Occam's Razor more often. And Freud's Projector less.

I thought I was just being a little clever with the parallel construction, but Scott claims (and Google seems to confirm) that I was actually being original: the phrase "Freud's Projector" doesn't seem to appear elsewhere on the internet. I'm inordinately proud of this.

Say what you like about Freud -- I certainly do -- but the concept of 'projection' remains a powerful tool for diagnosing social pathologies.

Comment Elsewhere: Humorless

2010-03-28T20:52:00.003-05:00

In comments at Grant Jones' blog I responded to Mr. Jones comment

Jack, I agree that Breitbart will have to be careful of doctored video being submitted as "proof." I wouldn't put such attempts past Progressives who believe that our means justify their ends.

with a well-deserved

ROFLMAO

Breitbart, after all, is the employer/sponsor of the infamous James O'Keefe, whose heavily doctored, fraudulent ACORN videos caused so much ruckus.

Mr. Jones has deleted my comment. To my knowledge, it's the first time he's done this, and he's certainly within his rights to do so. But it stinks.

(Also, as an aside, I'm not sure what "our means justify their ends" actually means...)

Picture: There will be Latkes

2010-03-28T12:17:00.001-05:00

Also need eggs, onion.

Political Messages

2010-03-21T14:36:00.001-05:00

I just sent this to someone who's getting a lot of attention right now:

Rep. Stupak,

Please inform your "bloc" of supporters in the House that I am going to be directing my political donations in 2010 to your and their primary opponents and to political action committees which support both health care and a woman's right to control her own body.

At this point I don't actually care whether you support the present bill or not, though it may affect the amounts that I'm willing to give.

No, I'm not a constituent. I live in a district represented by a callow and useless Republican. I depend on the Democratic Party, which I've supported quite faithfully in the past, to represent my views even though I live in a district which is hostile to them.

You, sir, and your allies are failures as Democrats.

Sincerely,

Picture: Snowflakes

2010-03-21T12:12:00.000-05:00

If it's warm enough above for big snowflakes, but not too warm, and cold enough that the snowflakes don't melt when they hit....

Comment Elsewhere: Fighting Fire with Laughter

2010-03-18T14:19:00.002-05:00

In response to concern about whether Alan Grayson's tone versus Sarah Palin was too caustic to be helpful, I said:

I’m ambivalent about this, honestly. There are times when a bully has to be stopped, and stopped hard. Palin’s been rude, borderline racist, divisive, evasive and manipulative; she got lucky in her career, but she’s abused her position at every opportunity. She should never have been a national political figure, and she’s neither newsworthy nor noteworthy, but the press has no idea how to report on issues, so her attacks get transmitted through the media, repeated endlessly, forcing Democrats to finally respond or look feckless. It’s classic abuser behavior: pushing and pushing, then whining about ‘fairness’ when someone stands up to them.

The only way to get the press to stop taking her seriously, to defang her politically, is for Democrats to stop taking her seriously, and to make the press look foolish for bothering to follow, quote and enable her. Grayson’s rhetoric has a hard edge on it, to be sure, but it’s pretty mild compared to Santorum or Steve King, or Issa, or McConnell, or a half dozen other Republican Congressional flamethrowers I could name. And, unlike most of their incendiary allegations, Grayson’s comments are based on verifiable facts and reasonable inferences.

Picture: Hostile Squirrel

2010-03-17T12:11:00.000-05:00

In fairness, the squirrel probably doesn't actually have any hostile intent. But he's not friendly, either.

Picture: February Frost

2010-03-10T09:11:00.000-05:00

Picture: Standing Slush

2010-03-07T09:09:00.001-05:00

Comment Elsewhere: Freedom and its Discontents

2010-03-07T00:39:00.002-05:00

In response to a fascinating discussion of recent news and law in the privacy and free speech field, I said:

Part of the problem is a failure to think things through: people want freedom to do or say anything, but they also want something done if someone else does something harmful or hateful. And our tolerance for risk is nil, so we're more inclined to over-react (if it's public).

Freedom is a balance, and there are risks. Otherwise, it's not freedom.

Picture of Perseverence: December Dandelion

2010-03-03T09:05:00.002-05:00