Thursday, March 13, 2014
i'm certainly not going to bother rescripting it. that took months. it's not worth it.
well, now that i'm forced to, i'm going to try and upgrade to 64 bit. all my scripts were for a 32 bit xp. some of the drivers have updated over the last several years, too, which was the other problem.
maybe it'll help offset the bloat.
scripted, that machine was super fast. it's only a 3.6 dual core, but it's way faster than this brand new five core hp laptop bogged down by windows 7. i was proud of that...
and, as mentioned, it was supposed to be modular. as depressed as i am right now, i'm really mad at myself for not backing it up yesterday afternoon. i would merely be annoyed right now, had i done that.
*sigh*.
in my defense, it wouldn't have been easy to back this stuff up. the script partition was 40 gb of software, the temp partition was 20 gb of iso files and avis.
further, most of my script partition is backed up in the storage drive, so i haven't lost much actual software. it's the script i lost, but i suspect i may have something close to it somewhere. i couldn't have backed up that much data onto a disc. and the reason it isn't imaged onto a series of ten or fifteen dvds is that i liked the flexibility of a script. who wants to go through 20 dvds every month?
...and the temp drive was just that. it was sitting there awaiting back-up to an external hd, once i got one big enough to hold all my music files. i was going to put that drive away somewhere.
further, everything that was on the temp drive is backed up across a dozen dvds - *except* the videos (some of which are on this laptop) and the remastered or modified files, which are all up at bandcamp. i can redo this, minus a handful of minor differences that if lost are lost. but, dammit...
well, now that i'm forced to, i'm going to try and upgrade to 64 bit. all my scripts were for a 32 bit xp. some of the drivers have updated over the last several years, too, which was the other problem.
maybe it'll help offset the bloat.
scripted, that machine was super fast. it's only a 3.6 dual core, but it's way faster than this brand new five core hp laptop bogged down by windows 7. i was proud of that...
and, as mentioned, it was supposed to be modular. as depressed as i am right now, i'm really mad at myself for not backing it up yesterday afternoon. i would merely be annoyed right now, had i done that.
*sigh*.
in my defense, it wouldn't have been easy to back this stuff up. the script partition was 40 gb of software, the temp partition was 20 gb of iso files and avis.
further, most of my script partition is backed up in the storage drive, so i haven't lost much actual software. it's the script i lost, but i suspect i may have something close to it somewhere. i couldn't have backed up that much data onto a disc. and the reason it isn't imaged onto a series of ten or fifteen dvds is that i liked the flexibility of a script. who wants to go through 20 dvds every month?
...and the temp drive was just that. it was sitting there awaiting back-up to an external hd, once i got one big enough to hold all my music files. i was going to put that drive away somewhere.
further, everything that was on the temp drive is backed up across a dozen dvds - *except* the videos (some of which are on this laptop) and the remastered or modified files, which are all up at bandcamp. i can redo this, minus a handful of minor differences that if lost are lost. but, dammit...
no. that drive's dead.
but i'm going to have to let it sit until april, anyways. maybe somebody at a data recovery shop will be able to get what i want out of it.
or maybe that's long enough to let it think it's back at the factory. that's ultimately what i think happened to the magically reworking laptop.
until then, i'm going to have to just keep going. i have one more trick to try - maybe it'll read through an external sata in. if not, i'm going to wait until i see if i can recover the data before i start downloading gigs of wave files from bandcamp.
but i'm going to have to let it sit until april, anyways. maybe somebody at a data recovery shop will be able to get what i want out of it.
or maybe that's long enough to let it think it's back at the factory. that's ultimately what i think happened to the magically reworking laptop.
until then, i'm going to have to just keep going. i have one more trick to try - maybe it'll read through an external sata in. if not, i'm going to wait until i see if i can recover the data before i start downloading gigs of wave files from bandcamp.
here's some hope: windows knows there's a disc plugged in. it says
it's "unknown", but it at least knows it's there. that's more than the
bios can say. so, i'm going to throw on a temp install and see if it
reads it...
i had a problem with my laptop's hard drive last month that in the end turned out to be a corrupted mbr. regarding the laptop, it was minor in the end cause....just reformat and that's that. but i cannot format this drive under any circumstance. and i even don't care about the hardware. it's almost ten years old. i don't think 250 gb drives are even on the market anymore.
i had a problem with my laptop's hard drive last month that in the end turned out to be a corrupted mbr. regarding the laptop, it was minor in the end cause....just reformat and that's that. but i cannot format this drive under any circumstance. and i even don't care about the hardware. it's almost ten years old. i don't think 250 gb drives are even on the market anymore.
it's doing something very strange that is both worrying me and giving
me some hope. it's only reading the empty drive if the failing one is
not plugged in. i mean at a bios stage. i've reset the cmos and it's not
helping.
so i'm going to start swapping cords around. i don't see why plugging in the failing hard drive should stop me from reading a functional one.
if it's a board problem, that's a bigger issue. but it might mean i can get the info off. which is what's important. i can replace a dead drive relatively easily. i can't replace some of what's on it without a great deal of effort.
so i'm going to start swapping cords around. i don't see why plugging in the failing hard drive should stop me from reading a functional one.
if it's a board problem, that's a bigger issue. but it might mean i can get the info off. which is what's important. i can replace a dead drive relatively easily. i can't replace some of what's on it without a great deal of effort.
i spoke too soon. the drive is not reading at all. i should have taken the data off while i had the chance.
the c: partition is designed to be throwaway. there are two smaller partitions that are not. one is an install partition with reinstall scripts. the other is a temporary partition that currently holds all of my temporary recording material.
i think i can reconstruct the last one, although it will be a lot of work. that's the most important, by far. i can't reinstall the machine as it is without the second, but i can get around that.
it could conceivably cost me a month. so i'm hoping i can get the data off somehow.
lesson learned: a chkdsk may stop a hard drive from whirring, but it doesn't mean it's fixed it. and i should have worried about it.
grargh.
so, i'm going quiet here *again* for the foreseeable future. *sigh*.
the c: partition is designed to be throwaway. there are two smaller partitions that are not. one is an install partition with reinstall scripts. the other is a temporary partition that currently holds all of my temporary recording material.
i think i can reconstruct the last one, although it will be a lot of work. that's the most important, by far. i can't reinstall the machine as it is without the second, but i can get around that.
it could conceivably cost me a month. so i'm hoping i can get the data off somehow.
lesson learned: a chkdsk may stop a hard drive from whirring, but it doesn't mean it's fixed it. and i should have worried about it.
grargh.
so, i'm going quiet here *again* for the foreseeable future. *sigh*.
that was a scare. hard drive started whirring on me....
it would have mostly been an annoyance. i built the pc to be modular. 1 tb total memory, over four 250 gb hard drives. rather than use something like raid, i've just left one empty. if a drive begins to die, and this hasn't happened yet, the plan is just to copy it over to the empty drive, unplug it and replace it. worst case, i might have to reinstall, but the process is automated.
as it is, a chkdsk stopped the whir and i'm not going to worry myself about it. but i blew the morning on that...
it would have mostly been an annoyance. i built the pc to be modular. 1 tb total memory, over four 250 gb hard drives. rather than use something like raid, i've just left one empty. if a drive begins to die, and this hasn't happened yet, the plan is just to copy it over to the empty drive, unplug it and replace it. worst case, i might have to reinstall, but the process is automated.
as it is, a chkdsk stopped the whir and i'm not going to worry myself about it. but i blew the morning on that...
well, i got the stuff printed on monday, then spent 6 hours walking on tuesday to finish up most necessary spring shopping, did spring cleaning (and much sleeping) on wednesday in the midst of a horrific blizzard and should get a start on the track today, after i do my taxes, duck student loan repayments for another six months and fill out some other necessary paperwork.
don't get me wrong. i appreciate the six hundred some dollars i'm getting back from rent. it's almost a month of rent. in theory, that's substantial.
but, if the government thinks it's doing me or the economy a favour by dividing it by twelve and giving me $50/month for the year, it's really sadly mistaken. what i'd like to do is spend the money on furniture. bookshelves and tables, specifically. at $50 a month, it's going to take all year to do something i'd rather do quickly. it's going to mean i'm going to have to save the money up over the course of a few months and probably go shopping every two months or so with roughly $100.
....except that it's a virtual certainty that i'm not going to do that. instead, i'm going to waste it on nothing of any importance, and mostly on items that are not taxable due to repressive laws.
i'm well aware that the idea is to prevent low income people from wasting it on drugs, or beer and popcorn, but whomever thought that up has obviously never been low income or done drugs, or drank beer and ate popcorn. there's not much chance i'm going to spend $650 all at once. that would be pretty much smoking myself stupid. however, there's a pretty good chance i'm going to pitter away what is more or less smoke money, at $50/month. the way to stop me from pissing it away is to give it to me all at once so i can spend it; the way to have me waste it is to give it to me in monthly installments that aren't enough to buy anything with.
as policy, it's just not very intelligently thought through.
i'm actually considering not claiming the energy credit, so the refund is under $360 and it just comes in in one chunk.
now, that's this year, when i just moved into a new place.
next year, $650 might buy me some gear if it comes in at once. if i played video games (i don't) it might have bought a new system, rather than a new game for an old one every month.
some people could use it to pay down credit card debts. $50/month just keeps them on the interest paying hamster wheel. useless.
...all to try and combat the imaginary problem of people blowing their tax returns on beer by budgeting them monthly beer money instead....
the other options are both more economically useful and more functionally useful.
of course if i was a real economist, i'd say something about investing it somewhere. which is probably true of a small number of people. you'd think that would be what they'd want.
but what i'm irked about is the idea that giving me a small amount will help me spend it more responsibly, because i'm too irresponsible to spend a lump sum. i'll even concede that i'm irresponsible, but they've got the whole thing backwards.
at least give me the choice how to adjust to my inherent irresponsibility, rather than trying to enforce a model of fiscal responsibility on me that is alien to what i know my nature is.
that sort of forced fiscal planning always fails.
but, if the government thinks it's doing me or the economy a favour by dividing it by twelve and giving me $50/month for the year, it's really sadly mistaken. what i'd like to do is spend the money on furniture. bookshelves and tables, specifically. at $50 a month, it's going to take all year to do something i'd rather do quickly. it's going to mean i'm going to have to save the money up over the course of a few months and probably go shopping every two months or so with roughly $100.
....except that it's a virtual certainty that i'm not going to do that. instead, i'm going to waste it on nothing of any importance, and mostly on items that are not taxable due to repressive laws.
i'm well aware that the idea is to prevent low income people from wasting it on drugs, or beer and popcorn, but whomever thought that up has obviously never been low income or done drugs, or drank beer and ate popcorn. there's not much chance i'm going to spend $650 all at once. that would be pretty much smoking myself stupid. however, there's a pretty good chance i'm going to pitter away what is more or less smoke money, at $50/month. the way to stop me from pissing it away is to give it to me all at once so i can spend it; the way to have me waste it is to give it to me in monthly installments that aren't enough to buy anything with.
as policy, it's just not very intelligently thought through.
i'm actually considering not claiming the energy credit, so the refund is under $360 and it just comes in in one chunk.
now, that's this year, when i just moved into a new place.
next year, $650 might buy me some gear if it comes in at once. if i played video games (i don't) it might have bought a new system, rather than a new game for an old one every month.
some people could use it to pay down credit card debts. $50/month just keeps them on the interest paying hamster wheel. useless.
...all to try and combat the imaginary problem of people blowing their tax returns on beer by budgeting them monthly beer money instead....
the other options are both more economically useful and more functionally useful.
of course if i was a real economist, i'd say something about investing it somewhere. which is probably true of a small number of people. you'd think that would be what they'd want.
but what i'm irked about is the idea that giving me a small amount will help me spend it more responsibly, because i'm too irresponsible to spend a lump sum. i'll even concede that i'm irresponsible, but they've got the whole thing backwards.
at least give me the choice how to adjust to my inherent irresponsibility, rather than trying to enforce a model of fiscal responsibility on me that is alien to what i know my nature is.
that sort of forced fiscal planning always fails.
Wednesday, March 12, 2014
you ever helped a bug get from a to b, or maybe moved it out of the sink because you're doing the dishes (but didn't want to kill it because it's a beneficial insect) by coercing it on to a spoon and then carrying the spoon across to a crack in the floor?
might that insect think it just had an experience with god, or perhaps was abducted by an air monster?
might that insect think it just had an experience with god, or perhaps was abducted by an air monster?
those shoes were actually split right down the sole, both feet. if somebody told me that a nefarious shoe vandal broke in overnight and used a machete to slice right through the bottom, i'd agree it was a plausible explanation of the state the shoes are in, if a little less credulous an explanation regarding the path of them getting there.
i hadn't checked the bottom until now. well, i could see holes on the front, so i didn't have to get that far to come to the conclusion that the shoes have holes. the rubber is worn through around the places the sole is cut, creating what is almost a "sinkhole" kind of effect.
just literally worn out.
....meaning i'd need more than epoxy or shoe goo to fix these things. i'd need plastic and rubber. and a 3-d printer might be useful. really, it would cost less in both labour and currency to replace them. they're dead.
so, they are now drying in the sink, until i can get them to a proper disposal centre along with a bunch of electronics and other things i've put aside. they were a pair of gravis skate shoes that lasted close to five years, which is not bad at all considering how much walking i do.
nothing to be done about that.
you should be able to see the slice through the material.
i'm actually surprised i couldn't feel this, except for the wet.
i hadn't checked the bottom until now. well, i could see holes on the front, so i didn't have to get that far to come to the conclusion that the shoes have holes. the rubber is worn through around the places the sole is cut, creating what is almost a "sinkhole" kind of effect.
just literally worn out.
....meaning i'd need more than epoxy or shoe goo to fix these things. i'd need plastic and rubber. and a 3-d printer might be useful. really, it would cost less in both labour and currency to replace them. they're dead.
so, they are now drying in the sink, until i can get them to a proper disposal centre along with a bunch of electronics and other things i've put aside. they were a pair of gravis skate shoes that lasted close to five years, which is not bad at all considering how much walking i do.
nothing to be done about that.
you should be able to see the slice through the material.
i'm actually surprised i couldn't feel this, except for the wet.
routers are universally marketed as wireless nowadays, but it turns out a lot of them are also wired - which is what i need. always have to ask, though...
i got the following response back from somebody:
"it has five wired ports in the back"
so, i think - a five port router? unusual, but not unheard of. i only need four, but why not...
i got the following response back from somebody:
"it has five wired ports in the back"
so, i think - a five port router? unusual, but not unheard of. i only need four, but why not...
ugh.
price after exchange rate conversion: $30.02
paypal balance: $30.
amount of time to wait to transfer the extra few cents: 8-10 days.
hopefully, the exchange rate will modify slightly in my favour before then.
actually, it already has.
a live rate says it should be $29.17.
and, you know, they advertise being up to date. bullshit. well, unless there's a hidden service fee.
i'm going to put it through and see what happens...
yeah, the rate they're using is just flat out wrong. 0.874590. but it hasn't gone that low in years. it's been down a little over the last month, but never below 0.89.
the rate hasn't been that low since summer, 2009.
some up to date exchange rate...
ok, there's a hidden fee, at 2.5%. adding 0.025 gets the current rate.
that two cents is still an incredible annoyance. hopefully, they just put it through. if not, it's not particularly unlikely that the rate will go up over .9 in the next day or two...
it was even over .9 this afternoon. low close.
lol...
it doesn't matter, because it's an e-check anyways, meaning i actually just wasted a week. ugh again.
<----- clearly using paypal for the first time. well, with a bank account anyways.
now my bank account is basically frozen for a week as i wait for the $30.02 to come out through e-check and the $30 to go back into the bank account from the paypal account, as i only had $45 in there. it should wash itself out, but i don't want to go under $31 as the e-check will probably clear before the transfer back in does.
*shrug*. i've got enough to eat for a few days.
price after exchange rate conversion: $30.02
paypal balance: $30.
amount of time to wait to transfer the extra few cents: 8-10 days.
hopefully, the exchange rate will modify slightly in my favour before then.
actually, it already has.
a live rate says it should be $29.17.
and, you know, they advertise being up to date. bullshit. well, unless there's a hidden service fee.
i'm going to put it through and see what happens...
yeah, the rate they're using is just flat out wrong. 0.874590. but it hasn't gone that low in years. it's been down a little over the last month, but never below 0.89.
the rate hasn't been that low since summer, 2009.
some up to date exchange rate...
ok, there's a hidden fee, at 2.5%. adding 0.025 gets the current rate.
that two cents is still an incredible annoyance. hopefully, they just put it through. if not, it's not particularly unlikely that the rate will go up over .9 in the next day or two...
it was even over .9 this afternoon. low close.
lol...
it doesn't matter, because it's an e-check anyways, meaning i actually just wasted a week. ugh again.
<----- clearly using paypal for the first time. well, with a bank account anyways.
now my bank account is basically frozen for a week as i wait for the $30.02 to come out through e-check and the $30 to go back into the bank account from the paypal account, as i only had $45 in there. it should wash itself out, but i don't want to go under $31 as the e-check will probably clear before the transfer back in does.
*shrug*. i've got enough to eat for a few days.
this is the closest thing i've yet to find to an unbiased report from the region. it's not unbiased in intent. but, it works itself out that way. see, basically, the guy is trying really hard to find something juicy, but isn't willing or able to fabricate it, so is instead demonstrating that the situation is very calm and under control.
Lee Grove
"Center for American Progress"? How is it funded?
Actually, I was serious. I have a friend at Morgan Stanley that says it is a Koch shell. And Orwell, surely, is bruising the backs of his hands applauding the Newspeak...
deathtokoalas
they're generally acknowledged as being exceedingly cozy with the white house. this guy is noticeably pushing talking points, and it's not an accident - but it's more about political support for the democratic party, rather than direct industry support.
"Center for American Progress"? How is it funded?
Actually, I was serious. I have a friend at Morgan Stanley that says it is a Koch shell. And Orwell, surely, is bruising the backs of his hands applauding the Newspeak...
deathtokoalas
they're generally acknowledged as being exceedingly cozy with the white house. this guy is noticeably pushing talking points, and it's not an accident - but it's more about political support for the democratic party, rather than direct industry support.
see, it's not actually a jewish state anyways...not any more than america is a christian one or...well, i guess the saudis are a muslim one...
if the so-called jewish state will not protect jews, isn't it time to abandon the delusion of israel as a jewish state and abolish the nation-state as an international principle?
i may not want much to do with ultra-orthodox members of any religion, and i doubt they'd extend the same respect to me. but they should not be forced to serve. nobody should be forced to serve in any army.
that being said, this opens up a can of worms. israel is currently on a path to being dominated by ultra-orthodox israelis and palestinians (or arab israelis), leaving secular jews as a tiny ruling elite. if the orthodox will not serve, who will? and, if the nation believes that prayers are more powerful than guns, is it worth saving from it's own stupidity?
simply moving to a secular, inclusive democracy where all races and religions are equal would end all of these middle age problems. i can't support the right to exist of any ethnic state, be it jewish or arab or any other identity.
if the so-called jewish state will not protect jews, isn't it time to abandon the delusion of israel as a jewish state and abolish the nation-state as an international principle?
i may not want much to do with ultra-orthodox members of any religion, and i doubt they'd extend the same respect to me. but they should not be forced to serve. nobody should be forced to serve in any army.
that being said, this opens up a can of worms. israel is currently on a path to being dominated by ultra-orthodox israelis and palestinians (or arab israelis), leaving secular jews as a tiny ruling elite. if the orthodox will not serve, who will? and, if the nation believes that prayers are more powerful than guns, is it worth saving from it's own stupidity?
simply moving to a secular, inclusive democracy where all races and religions are equal would end all of these middle age problems. i can't support the right to exist of any ethnic state, be it jewish or arab or any other identity.
i don't agree with her position, but i don't think she's being inconsistent. it's a standard (if incoherent) statist liberal position about the government upholding the "rule of law". which is to say that she's not stepping back from her support of government spying, she's just upset that the elected government isn't able to properly manage the unelected part.
...although she does also seem to be trying to change the subject.
...although she does also seem to be trying to change the subject.
weird dream.
and i don't think i'm doing much over the next 24 hours or so. very sore from 6 hours of walking yesterday...
it always astounds me how many self-identified socialists will go on and on about the benefits of small businesses, especially v. big business. sticking it to the man. that kind of bullshit.
what they seem to not realize is that their arguments consistently reduce to free market arguments, as their vision certainly aligns with a free market society: small, independent businesses everywhere that are competing with each other.
what astounds me is that workers are never mentioned by any of these self-identified socialists. the rhetoric about hating the establishment at no point translates into questions of working conditions.
so, can the local diner afford a dental plan for their dishwasher? can mom & pop afford sick days for their cashiers? do they have any kind of union representation for disagreements?
of course not, nor are they feasible in the liberal fantasy world of open markets and contract theory. rather, these things are only made possible by unions that develop out of large businesses.
it follows that socialists should boycott small businesses and shop purely at large businesses. yet, try debating that without getting an earful of liberal market theory thrown at you.
now, that doesn't mean that there aren't moral questions to ask in engaging in commerce. i've bought some sneakers over the last few days and had little option but to get shoes made by children in asia, because that is what exists. on the other hand, i tend to buy jeans and shirts second hand. if i know one grocery store is not unionized and another is, i'll choose the unionized one. likewise, walmart is never my first choice.
...but a bourgeois society based on private ownership of small business, which is made possible by workers that are essentially personal slaves and exist solely to generate profit for bosses, is something to fight against, rather than uphold - and the preferred socialist model as an alternative to that liberal society is rooted in economies of scale made possible by collectivized labour and redistributed profit, which is something that is very big in nature.
and i don't think i'm doing much over the next 24 hours or so. very sore from 6 hours of walking yesterday...
it always astounds me how many self-identified socialists will go on and on about the benefits of small businesses, especially v. big business. sticking it to the man. that kind of bullshit.
what they seem to not realize is that their arguments consistently reduce to free market arguments, as their vision certainly aligns with a free market society: small, independent businesses everywhere that are competing with each other.
what astounds me is that workers are never mentioned by any of these self-identified socialists. the rhetoric about hating the establishment at no point translates into questions of working conditions.
so, can the local diner afford a dental plan for their dishwasher? can mom & pop afford sick days for their cashiers? do they have any kind of union representation for disagreements?
of course not, nor are they feasible in the liberal fantasy world of open markets and contract theory. rather, these things are only made possible by unions that develop out of large businesses.
it follows that socialists should boycott small businesses and shop purely at large businesses. yet, try debating that without getting an earful of liberal market theory thrown at you.
now, that doesn't mean that there aren't moral questions to ask in engaging in commerce. i've bought some sneakers over the last few days and had little option but to get shoes made by children in asia, because that is what exists. on the other hand, i tend to buy jeans and shirts second hand. if i know one grocery store is not unionized and another is, i'll choose the unionized one. likewise, walmart is never my first choice.
...but a bourgeois society based on private ownership of small business, which is made possible by workers that are essentially personal slaves and exist solely to generate profit for bosses, is something to fight against, rather than uphold - and the preferred socialist model as an alternative to that liberal society is rooted in economies of scale made possible by collectivized labour and redistributed profit, which is something that is very big in nature.
Tuesday, March 11, 2014
6 hour walk.
dead feet. tender calves.
...but a few tasks completed.
for a small city, it is about as scattered as possible. i want to say it's badly planned, and it is, especially the lack of sidewalks, but it's more like it's planned as a giant suburb of detroit rather than a city of it's own.
so, the necessity of fixing my bike is quite apparent.
one of the things i needed to get was some water resistant spray for some shoes. there's plenty of options, but they're all at least an hour walk one way or the other. how can that be? i'm not sure, but i'm going to take a guess....
see, if i walk down the street that comprises the business district closest to me, it's pretty sketchy. there are some successful businesses, and some very old ones. but a lot of the storefronts are either boarded up or for rent.
could these have previously been somewhere to get shoe spray? it's a reasonable deduction, i think.
for twice the price that it's sold at walmart.
so, i'm going to hypothesize that windsor is in that middle phase where the big box stores have decimated local businesses and they haven't moved into the core yet.
i have to think that there will eventually be a mall built downtown. right now, it's just strip malls a km or two in either direction and a half dead city in the core.
which is why the rent is cheap.
which is why i'm here...
with the spray specifically, i think there's a few places around here i could try and i'd guess at least one would stock it. it's an example of limited actual applicability. i wouldn't have gone as far as i did just for that, and probably wouldn't have actually had to. any kind of electronics would be a better example.
dead feet. tender calves.
...but a few tasks completed.
for a small city, it is about as scattered as possible. i want to say it's badly planned, and it is, especially the lack of sidewalks, but it's more like it's planned as a giant suburb of detroit rather than a city of it's own.
so, the necessity of fixing my bike is quite apparent.
one of the things i needed to get was some water resistant spray for some shoes. there's plenty of options, but they're all at least an hour walk one way or the other. how can that be? i'm not sure, but i'm going to take a guess....
see, if i walk down the street that comprises the business district closest to me, it's pretty sketchy. there are some successful businesses, and some very old ones. but a lot of the storefronts are either boarded up or for rent.
could these have previously been somewhere to get shoe spray? it's a reasonable deduction, i think.
for twice the price that it's sold at walmart.
so, i'm going to hypothesize that windsor is in that middle phase where the big box stores have decimated local businesses and they haven't moved into the core yet.
i have to think that there will eventually be a mall built downtown. right now, it's just strip malls a km or two in either direction and a half dead city in the core.
which is why the rent is cheap.
which is why i'm here...
with the spray specifically, i think there's a few places around here i could try and i'd guess at least one would stock it. it's an example of limited actual applicability. i wouldn't have gone as far as i did just for that, and probably wouldn't have actually had to. any kind of electronics would be a better example.
man, this guy is out of it. the eu is run by hard-right franco-german neo-liberals, not scandinavian social democrats.
and iraq was not a nato operation.
now, if you'll excuse me, i'm hungry. i'm going to have some freedom fries. with gravy. and cheese.
http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=11557
he's right about the base though.
russia cannot allow nato forces into crimea.
and iraq was not a nato operation.
now, if you'll excuse me, i'm hungry. i'm going to have some freedom fries. with gravy. and cheese.
http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=11557
he's right about the base though.
russia cannot allow nato forces into crimea.
Monday, March 10, 2014
adrian belew - desire caught by the tail
benchmark
this was belew's first serious solo attempt, and his last for many years. it's also a record of quite subtle merits, but revolutionary in it's own sphere.
there's a lot of accusations one could honestly level at belew on this, without the need for much of an argument or the production of much dissent. does he really know how to write tangos or "gypsy music"? does he know anything of substance about the impressionism and serialism he's leaning towards? well, it's rather apparent that he doesn't, really. he consequently falls into a number of clichés in the process of being pretentious about the whole thing. the reality is that he doesn't have a phd in ethnomusicology and it very much shows.
so, he's not al di meola.
....but if you want a di meola disc, there are plenty to choose from. this is a different animal altogether, in the sense that it is apparently entirely synthesized. if you've flipped on a synth, you know how this works. you start by perusing the preset banks for a bit, pushing a few keys and just kind of jamming. when you get to the last preset bank, you're presented with a series of instruments you've never heard of before. you think "gee. what's an ocarina?", as you hack some asian sounding thing out. within twenty minutes, you've got the board split to gongs on the bottom half (which you're mashing with your palm) and a synthesized wind chime on the other, and you're pretending as though you know what it would feel like to discover a pristine, untouched lake on the china/tibet border...
after an hour or so, the guy that owns the store hits you with a mallet and you snap out of it. it was fun while it lasted...
....you certainly never contemplate releasing what you just did on island records, then expecting it to sell more than ten copies. note that this disc is currently many years out of print.
so, it's easy to deduce that this is how a lot of the non-western sounds found their way into this: simple curiosity spurred on by playing with the presets on a synthesizer. yet, the sound on this record isn't being produced by a traditional keyboard synthesizer. rather, it's being produced by a cutting edge roland guitar synthesizer. for that reason, i'm very much willing to forgive the pretension. see, it's what the record is: a self-taught, abstract guitarist playing around with a toy that wasn't just new to him, but pretty much new to the world. if you remove a handful of words from the title tracks, what you're left with is music that sounds like it came from nowhere on this planet at all.
that's not to say that the songs are badly constructed. the clichés are at times heavy-handed, but the record is stronger for them. take the third track, for instance. it sounds exactly like a self-taught guitarist pretending he knows how to write ethnic roma music, which is precisely what it is. yet, breaking through the pretension produces a bizarre jam that stands up well on it's own, when taken out of that context. i mean, i wouldn't have otherwise thought to think that. the second track combines circus music with a standard blues progression, all through a haze of synthesized guitar work, in a way that leaves you scratching your head and wondering what you just listened to. so, stripping out the hackneyed attempt at ethnic music would deny the record of it's charm and leave what is yet another experiment in frippertronics. that doesn't mean that the hackneyed attempt at ethnic music needs to be interpreted as ethnic music at all; rather, it's nature as a hackneyed attempt makes it very easy to completely ignore. a more substantial criticism is that the tracks are obviously mostly improvised, and might be perceived to meander a little. yet, that meandering can also be perceived as comprehensively exploring the synth tones. i don't personally find that it drags, but i realize that my own bias on the point (being a fan of abstract guitar music) is likely substantial.
the result is admittedly a record that is defined more by the tools used to create it than by the notes within it; insofar as it is the latter rather than the former, it's a substantial piece of music in a historical context. this is the sole reason i'm grading it as highly as i am. the last point is really central: i am a fan of abstract guitar music. if you are not, this might not be for you. if you are, you'll likely at least appreciate the record as carving out a unique space in the spectrum of guitar music. no, it may not excel as a conventional piece of music in much of any way, but as an unconventional piece of music it's not really convincingly comparable to anything else i've ever heard. that makes it something to isolate as unique and still potentially genre-defining, as well as an essential record to explore - if not an essential record to love.
stream:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_mpb8sKnQAZ8yQ8ZEuMGji1pNwXFR8l6_o
http://dghjdfsghkrdghdgja.appspot.com/categories/music/artists/AdrianBelew/1986-DesireCaughtByTheTail/index.html
adrian belew - here
listenable
musical success is a difficult thing to understand in the era of big labels and mass marketed products. what seems to cut through the haze of aggressively marketed plastic images is often a sense of accidental honesty (sometimes accidentally on purpose). belew had the right combination of talent and eccentricity that he may have potentially been able to tap into this back door to large scale success had he simply done the things that made him unique. instead, he lost a few years in the early 90s trying way too hard and falling flat on his face. this site reviews my personal collection, which does not include the records he released in 1989, 1990 or 1992 because they do not overlap with my tastes - and more or less precisely for the aforementioned reason.
nor was he at all coy about it. 1989's mr. music head opens with a duet with his young daughter that declares that he's going to make it to the big time. gabriel references aside, there's a certain desperation in his projection that seems utterly forced. this was followed up quickly by a collaboration with david bowie, 1990's young lions, that is as notable for bowie sounding tired, clichéd and ten years out of date as it is for belew trying to piggyback him to greater success. these records do not veer far from belew's out of touch sense of popular music, which happens to also be a blatant attempt to emulate the bands he had previously done session work with.
it's not that this record veers particularly far from what he was doing in the early 90s. there is a noticeably heightened beatles influence, but that was always present. he's still drawing heavily on both berlin-era bowie and on the talking heads. it's more that he seems to have regained some perspective about who he is as an artist. the fourth track on this record, fly, seems to end the thought that began mr. music head:
after all, i'm only sand
to irritate the oyster and
to wait for a pearl
and even though i must concede
greatness has eluded me
i'd still miss the world
he actually seems to be contemplating (and firmly rejecting) thoughts of suicide stemming from what he's interpreted as a failed career as a pop musician, opting instead for a resignation towards the meaninglessness of existence. the track is absolutely gorgeous, and a fan favourite, but it's also a turning point in his career. from this point on, his concern shifts purely to producing abstract music. this is where he seems to have finally found himself, in his mid 40s.
for the disc at hand, this does not manifest itself in a radical change but in a greater focus on both the depth of the songwriting and in the nature of the production. he sounds refocused and more down to earth. the hooks are more fluid, the flourishes more idiosyncratic, the solos more heartfelt. ironically, it's once he gives up that he produces something that could have been a left-field alternative rock hit in the late 80s. by '94, though, the music world had changed far too much for any chance of this selling beyond his existing fan base. regardless, i'd argue it's the best of his handful of pure pop records.
so, there's maybe a lesson here about staying true to yourself.
stream:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLKoDHRV0ImP-Ur3lR19tRb7ZypFZJT4N1
http://dghjdfsghkrdghdgja.appspot.com/categories/music/artists/AdrianBelew/1994-Here/index.html
"we want democracy, like they have in america"
*sigh*
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GU68dGqLe0Q
what the report is doing is drawing attention to the false dichotomy that is presented in over-simplified news reports. it's not just in ukraine that we see this. we see it essentially anywhere there is public action. the media consistently wants to ignore the actual views of protestors on the ground by folding them into what the political opposition is dictating. the projected perception is that protests are organized by establishment groups in the opposition, in order to carry out their aims. the reality is usually that establishment groups co-opt the protests and use them as an excuse to ram through their already existing ideas.
this is exactly what's happened there. the government that has taken over is a coalition of nationalist extremists (svoboda) and the established conservative party, which is composed of eu-backed bankers and ukrainian oligarchs. they're taking advantage of the situation (in a shock doctrine sort of way) to ram through imf policies designed to loot the country and destroy the economy.
so, a popular revolution? hardly. if the republicans seized power from a democratic administration as a result of escalating street protests, that wouldn't be considered a revolution in america because nothing would have actually changed. likewise, what happened in ukraine was that power was handed over from the left-leaning section of the elite to the right-leaning section of it. the elite remain dominant.
so, what of the people? what do they think? where is their voice, in the crosstalk between factions of the ukrainian elite?
there's been almost complete media silence on the issue.
*sigh*
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GU68dGqLe0Q
what the report is doing is drawing attention to the false dichotomy that is presented in over-simplified news reports. it's not just in ukraine that we see this. we see it essentially anywhere there is public action. the media consistently wants to ignore the actual views of protestors on the ground by folding them into what the political opposition is dictating. the projected perception is that protests are organized by establishment groups in the opposition, in order to carry out their aims. the reality is usually that establishment groups co-opt the protests and use them as an excuse to ram through their already existing ideas.
this is exactly what's happened there. the government that has taken over is a coalition of nationalist extremists (svoboda) and the established conservative party, which is composed of eu-backed bankers and ukrainian oligarchs. they're taking advantage of the situation (in a shock doctrine sort of way) to ram through imf policies designed to loot the country and destroy the economy.
so, a popular revolution? hardly. if the republicans seized power from a democratic administration as a result of escalating street protests, that wouldn't be considered a revolution in america because nothing would have actually changed. likewise, what happened in ukraine was that power was handed over from the left-leaning section of the elite to the right-leaning section of it. the elite remain dominant.
so, what of the people? what do they think? where is their voice, in the crosstalk between factions of the ukrainian elite?
there's been almost complete media silence on the issue.
freakishly small feet strike again.
a few months ago, i bought a pair of little girl's rainboots because they fit and they were only $6. not sized.
my shoes are demoed to the point that walking on moist ground produces wet socks, so i took a walk around. i'll get some goo later and save them for emergency; i just wanted to see if i could get something cheap, as that's easier. it turns out i'm a children's size 6, and just about any pair of adult shoes is literally not made in my size.
seriously. i spent an hour in the adult section looking for something small enough, before i walked over to the kid's aisle...
i actually can't remember the last time i bought a pair of sneakers. for years, i've been inheriting shoes from my sister, who has a habit of ending up with shoes that are too small, somehow. i don't ask questions, i just take the shoes. but it means i'm not sizing my feet. the ones she gives me are usually a tad big, but i deal with it.
well, now i know. and there's an upside to it, as kids shoes seem to be cheaper...
the ones i picked up were in a weird store a few blocks down that is something like a cross between a dollar store and a kmart. everything in the place is cheap. they actually had a two-for-one sale, which is the only reason i bothered. even if they are gone at the end of the year, two pairs of shoes for $15 is something i can deal with in the short run.
i think i'll make 'em last longer, though. i've been known to wear $10 shoes for three or four years - until they develop holes, basically.
with stuff like shoes, i'm actually convinced it all more or less comes off the same assembly line. $10 walmart shoes and $150 nike shoes are made by the same children in asia, they just have different labels stamped on them. i don't see any reason to pay more than the least amount possible for it.
it's less that the inexpensive shoes aren't cheap and more that the expensive ones are just as cheap and preposterously priced.
the handful of counter-examples seem to mostly be skateboarding shoes, which are built differently because there's a higher wear level. i have tended to gravitate towards them for that reason.
it actually seems to be the salt that finally ate through a part of the pair i just replaced. i'm thinking if i clean them up, then patch them with the rest of the epoxy i have left that should extend their life. but i needed something with better grip, anyways.
for me, a big part of "urban living" is walking everywhere. this isn't currently the best city for that lifestyle, which just puts extra stress on the shoes. when you're regularly walking five or more km, it doesn't matter what the label on your shoes is - they're going to fall apart. so, you'd might as well try and strengthen them.
i think with the salted through ones, the epoxy will actually make them stronger.
a few months ago, i bought a pair of little girl's rainboots because they fit and they were only $6. not sized.
my shoes are demoed to the point that walking on moist ground produces wet socks, so i took a walk around. i'll get some goo later and save them for emergency; i just wanted to see if i could get something cheap, as that's easier. it turns out i'm a children's size 6, and just about any pair of adult shoes is literally not made in my size.
seriously. i spent an hour in the adult section looking for something small enough, before i walked over to the kid's aisle...
i actually can't remember the last time i bought a pair of sneakers. for years, i've been inheriting shoes from my sister, who has a habit of ending up with shoes that are too small, somehow. i don't ask questions, i just take the shoes. but it means i'm not sizing my feet. the ones she gives me are usually a tad big, but i deal with it.
well, now i know. and there's an upside to it, as kids shoes seem to be cheaper...
the ones i picked up were in a weird store a few blocks down that is something like a cross between a dollar store and a kmart. everything in the place is cheap. they actually had a two-for-one sale, which is the only reason i bothered. even if they are gone at the end of the year, two pairs of shoes for $15 is something i can deal with in the short run.
i think i'll make 'em last longer, though. i've been known to wear $10 shoes for three or four years - until they develop holes, basically.
with stuff like shoes, i'm actually convinced it all more or less comes off the same assembly line. $10 walmart shoes and $150 nike shoes are made by the same children in asia, they just have different labels stamped on them. i don't see any reason to pay more than the least amount possible for it.
it's less that the inexpensive shoes aren't cheap and more that the expensive ones are just as cheap and preposterously priced.
the handful of counter-examples seem to mostly be skateboarding shoes, which are built differently because there's a higher wear level. i have tended to gravitate towards them for that reason.
it actually seems to be the salt that finally ate through a part of the pair i just replaced. i'm thinking if i clean them up, then patch them with the rest of the epoxy i have left that should extend their life. but i needed something with better grip, anyways.
for me, a big part of "urban living" is walking everywhere. this isn't currently the best city for that lifestyle, which just puts extra stress on the shoes. when you're regularly walking five or more km, it doesn't matter what the label on your shoes is - they're going to fall apart. so, you'd might as well try and strengthen them.
i think with the salted through ones, the epoxy will actually make them stronger.
Sunday, March 9, 2014
the gateway drug argument is a classical logical fallacy, and the way that fallacy is being bludgeoned here by nancy grace (the demagogue) is absolutely classic fox news. my head shakes every time.
if a person does hard drugs, they began with soft drugs
x does soft drugs
therefore, x will "graduate" to hard drugs
most people that have finished grade ten can intuitively see the flaw in that logic. if they can't, they probably wouldn't get through first year. it's literally logic 101.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hbc-Sbx5ckA
if a person does hard drugs, they began with soft drugs
x does soft drugs
therefore, x will "graduate" to hard drugs
most people that have finished grade ten can intuitively see the flaw in that logic. if they can't, they probably wouldn't get through first year. it's literally logic 101.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hbc-Sbx5ckA
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/01/13/frjp-j13.html
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/01/14/iran-j14.html
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/01/16/pers-j16.html
a lot of nonsense.
but political prisoners aren't randomly released. what's going on?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dl4l7GgSF58
worse, the "interim government" doesn't have a mandate to make these kinds of big decisions. it's a caretaker government, not a revolutionary one.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C28FekEyufI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lfmmXiCY1s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5WSgKQK7x_s
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/01/14/iran-j14.html
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/01/16/pers-j16.html
a lot of nonsense.
but political prisoners aren't randomly released. what's going on?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dl4l7GgSF58
worse, the "interim government" doesn't have a mandate to make these kinds of big decisions. it's a caretaker government, not a revolutionary one.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C28FekEyufI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lfmmXiCY1s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5WSgKQK7x_s
Saturday, March 8, 2014
this is a really irresponsible article. not because it's wrong, exactly, but because it's completely speculative - and not in an academic sense. it's just "well, maybe white people come from asia". maybe they come from uranus.
or maybe it's completely ridiculous to think that a single dna sample describes the entirety of genetic diversity in western europe 7,000 years ago. maybe there was a gradient.
maybe it's actually even totally obvious that there was a gradient.
europe has never been entirely white in the historical era. most spaniards, italians and greeks are of a tanned complexion. this is a combination of genetic drift from the south and plasticity, rather than any kind of selection. to understand the plasticity look at a californian of scandinavian ancestry. pasty white? hardly. why think europe would or even could have been of a homogenous skin tone 10,000 years ago? there's an implicit purity myth underlying that. and, that's not a myth that required further debunking.
so, there was a gradient. they found somebody on one end of it. they'll find people on the other end of it as time goes on. and the understanding will be a continuity of high variation deep into the past, not implications about some kind of fantastical past that had these ideal types living in some abstracted racial purity.
in actuality, there's no such thing as white people - and no such thing as black people. there's a lot of people that exist in a spectrum. that is all.
it's interesting that he cites sforza, though, because his data really isn't consistent. what sforza demonstrates is what remains - to my knowledge - the dominant theory of the origin of caucasian peoples in general, namely that they developed in isolated packets on the other side of the ice sheets and moved south when the sheets started melting (not just into europe, but also into central and eastern asia. that creates a common light-skinned ancestor between europeans and both west and east asians dating to about 15000 years ago). he sees three general migrations. that first migration was starting around 10,000 years ago - enough time that it would have penetrated spain, but not eliminated all variation with skin type. but it was about superior hunting technology,not skin colour. as far as we know, spain has never been homogenous in regards to skin tone. ever. and it's always seen substantial migration coming from the south. the second migration came with agriculture, which moved near eastern peoples into europe. what colour these people were is an interesting question, but i think it's almost certain that they weren't white in the scandinavian sense. the third migration brought indo-european languages in through the dominance of horse domestication. we can isolate the indo-european homeland quite well to the area north of ukraine, which makes it seem as though they were probably white. there's some debate over whether that means pasty white or more of a turkish white.
so let's carefully understand what i just said. that's a movement of white people south, and then the replacement of those white people by "swarmy" people moving north from the middle east, followed by another movement of white peoples. that is to say that the dominant understanding of the migration of european peoples is not related to racial dominance or skin colour evolving to an environment (the vitamin d thing is bollocks), but to technological innovation. if skin colour had anything at all to do with it, it was merely coincidental.
but it moved back and forth. that's what i'm getting at: brown, white, tanned, white. and, again, that would have created a spectrum full of diversity, not something homogenous.
another place to see this variation is iran. skin colour has a wide spectrum in iran, because it's been invaded by many different peoples. but you'll note that there's no pattern regarding one colour being more dominant than the other. lighter skinned iranians defeated darker skinned elamites, then darker skinned arabs defeated the iranians, and lighter skinned turks and mongols defeated the arabs. today, they're all there in iran, all mixed up. so, there's a great amount of diversity.
where you see the homogeneity develop is only in areas with very small amounts of gene flow. that would include scandinavia, as well as central africa - but not eastern africa, where a gradient also exists.
so, we can drop the silliness. this discovery neither backs up the silly and blatantly racist idea that vitamin d absorption provides an evolutionary advantage (one would expect the inuit and eastern native americans to be pasty white, and yet they are not), nor does it demonstrate much of anything at all about the diversity of the population in spain 7000 years ago.
it's just one sample.
http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/02/07/where-did-white-people-come-from/
the way to abolish the perceived racial hierarchy isn't to wave it away with a lot of shoddy science.
it's simply to point out that the idea that white people have been dominant throughout history is nothing more than a myth in the first place.
similarly with the eyes...
finding a dark skinned person with blue eyes 7000 years ago doesn't say anything about where the mutation developed. it's just as plausible that it developed in central europe and drifted south as it did that it developed in africa and drifted north.
but, that offends american sensibilities regarding "inter-racial" offspring. there's an assumption that white and black could not have interbred. it's implicit, unstated - because it's perceived of as obvious.
but it's not obvious at all. and, yes, it's completely fucking racist.
or maybe it's completely ridiculous to think that a single dna sample describes the entirety of genetic diversity in western europe 7,000 years ago. maybe there was a gradient.
maybe it's actually even totally obvious that there was a gradient.
europe has never been entirely white in the historical era. most spaniards, italians and greeks are of a tanned complexion. this is a combination of genetic drift from the south and plasticity, rather than any kind of selection. to understand the plasticity look at a californian of scandinavian ancestry. pasty white? hardly. why think europe would or even could have been of a homogenous skin tone 10,000 years ago? there's an implicit purity myth underlying that. and, that's not a myth that required further debunking.
so, there was a gradient. they found somebody on one end of it. they'll find people on the other end of it as time goes on. and the understanding will be a continuity of high variation deep into the past, not implications about some kind of fantastical past that had these ideal types living in some abstracted racial purity.
in actuality, there's no such thing as white people - and no such thing as black people. there's a lot of people that exist in a spectrum. that is all.
it's interesting that he cites sforza, though, because his data really isn't consistent. what sforza demonstrates is what remains - to my knowledge - the dominant theory of the origin of caucasian peoples in general, namely that they developed in isolated packets on the other side of the ice sheets and moved south when the sheets started melting (not just into europe, but also into central and eastern asia. that creates a common light-skinned ancestor between europeans and both west and east asians dating to about 15000 years ago). he sees three general migrations. that first migration was starting around 10,000 years ago - enough time that it would have penetrated spain, but not eliminated all variation with skin type. but it was about superior hunting technology,not skin colour. as far as we know, spain has never been homogenous in regards to skin tone. ever. and it's always seen substantial migration coming from the south. the second migration came with agriculture, which moved near eastern peoples into europe. what colour these people were is an interesting question, but i think it's almost certain that they weren't white in the scandinavian sense. the third migration brought indo-european languages in through the dominance of horse domestication. we can isolate the indo-european homeland quite well to the area north of ukraine, which makes it seem as though they were probably white. there's some debate over whether that means pasty white or more of a turkish white.
so let's carefully understand what i just said. that's a movement of white people south, and then the replacement of those white people by "swarmy" people moving north from the middle east, followed by another movement of white peoples. that is to say that the dominant understanding of the migration of european peoples is not related to racial dominance or skin colour evolving to an environment (the vitamin d thing is bollocks), but to technological innovation. if skin colour had anything at all to do with it, it was merely coincidental.
but it moved back and forth. that's what i'm getting at: brown, white, tanned, white. and, again, that would have created a spectrum full of diversity, not something homogenous.
another place to see this variation is iran. skin colour has a wide spectrum in iran, because it's been invaded by many different peoples. but you'll note that there's no pattern regarding one colour being more dominant than the other. lighter skinned iranians defeated darker skinned elamites, then darker skinned arabs defeated the iranians, and lighter skinned turks and mongols defeated the arabs. today, they're all there in iran, all mixed up. so, there's a great amount of diversity.
where you see the homogeneity develop is only in areas with very small amounts of gene flow. that would include scandinavia, as well as central africa - but not eastern africa, where a gradient also exists.
so, we can drop the silliness. this discovery neither backs up the silly and blatantly racist idea that vitamin d absorption provides an evolutionary advantage (one would expect the inuit and eastern native americans to be pasty white, and yet they are not), nor does it demonstrate much of anything at all about the diversity of the population in spain 7000 years ago.
it's just one sample.
http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/02/07/where-did-white-people-come-from/
the way to abolish the perceived racial hierarchy isn't to wave it away with a lot of shoddy science.
it's simply to point out that the idea that white people have been dominant throughout history is nothing more than a myth in the first place.
similarly with the eyes...
finding a dark skinned person with blue eyes 7000 years ago doesn't say anything about where the mutation developed. it's just as plausible that it developed in central europe and drifted south as it did that it developed in africa and drifted north.
but, that offends american sensibilities regarding "inter-racial" offspring. there's an assumption that white and black could not have interbred. it's implicit, unstated - because it's perceived of as obvious.
but it's not obvious at all. and, yes, it's completely fucking racist.
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/03/07/spyi-m07.html
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2014/03/06/the_presidents_man
http://on.rt.com/y5e40w
http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/03/06/ukraine-through-the-fog-of-the-presstitutes/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2R7chF70UTw
http://bitly.com/1mQvh6p
http://on.rt.com/zq8occ
http://en.ria.ru/russia/20140307/188197242/Russia-Warns-US-Sanctions-Would-Have-Boomerang-Effect.html
http://on.rt.com/yx4zrx
http://www.cnas.org/content/lure-nationalism#.UxjlRvldXvw
http://on.cfr.org/1fW50OF
http://ceasefiremagazine.co.uk/north-london-council-evict-1500-tenants-unauthorised-living-industrial-warehouses/
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2014/03/04/islamic_front_isis_syria
http://blogs.cfr.org/asia/2014/03/03/doctors-without-borders-kicked-out-of-myanmar-hatred-rising/?cid=soc-facebook-in-doctors_without_borders_kicked_out_of_myanmar_hatred_rising-030314
http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2014/03/03/germany_and_us_diverge_over_russia_sanctions
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2014/03/07/obama_is_more_eisenhower_than_carter_putin_crimea
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2014/03/07/people-havent-left-kievs-maidan-heres-what-it-looks-and-feels-like-now/
http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/03/07/crimea-this-time/
http://en.ria.ru/world/20140307/188188127/Russias-Gazprom-Warns-Ukraine-of-New-Gas-War.html
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/03/07/ukra-m07.html
http://fpif.org/saving-blue-future/
http://fpif.org/behind-karzais-stubbornness/
http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/03/05/ukraine-and-the-great-asian-enclosure/
http://on.rt.com/7l2or9
http://on.rt.com/z1i9bg
http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/03/04/crimea-river/
http://www.fpri.org/articles/2014/03/ukraine-and-misunderstood-budapest-memorandum
http://www.euronews.com/2014/03/07/china-rejects-sanctions-as-a-way-to-resolve-ukraine-crisis/
http://indrus.in/blogs/2014/03/06/why_a_militarily_powerful_russia_is_good_for_the_world_33561.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/henry-kissinger-to-settle-the-ukraine-crisis-start-at-the-end/2014/03/05/46dad868-a496-11e3-8466-d34c451760b9_story.html
http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/01/30/the-politics-of-starvation-in-syria/
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/03/03/kaza-m03.html
http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/03/03/ukraine-intervention-and-americas-doublethink/
http://on.rt.com/k1bkw8
http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/03/03/the-dark-side-of-the-ukraine-revolt/
http://rt.com/news/syria-saudi-missiles-russia-741/
http://wapo.st/1icrLBd
http://en.trend.az/news/incident/2249083.html
http://www.themoscowtimes.com/business/article/who-does-putin-want-as-ukrainian-president/495810.html
http://www.kyivpost.com/content/politics/yatseniuk-ukraine-to-sign-deal-with-eu-within-weeks-338707.html
http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/12/31/profits-may-rise-profits-may-fall-the-capitalist-system-doesnt-care-at-all/
http://fpif.org/u-s-continues-stand-bahrain/
http://fpif.org/open-fire-open-markets-asia-pacific-pivot-trans-pacific-partnership/
http://fpif.org/al-qaeda-seizure-falluja-throws-u-s-attitudes-toward-iraq-sharp-relief/
http://fpif.org/sun-also-rises-resisting-militarism-japan/
http://fpif.org/netanyahu-vs-spooks/
http://fpif.org/thailands-deep-divide/
http://fpif.org/united-nations-description-burmas-rohingya-friendless-true/
http://fpif.org/asia-pacific-pivot-smoke-firepower/
http://fpif.org/thailands-protests-global-economy/
http://fpif.org/color-wars/
http://fpif.org/will-gulf-cooperation-council-react-u-s-iran-nuclear-deal/
http://fpif.org/riding-u-s-iran-nuclear-rollercoaster/
http://fpif.org/abe-road/
as i think more about this, i'm beginning to realize that europe's non-reaction to the right-wing elements in the ukrainian parliament is a functioning of the normalization of far right politics in eastern europe. essentially every country in western europe, even, has a politically measurable far right party. well, they said the eec was put together by ex-nazis from the start. and as time has gone on, the same coalition between politics and banks has developed, even if the cartel systems have been removed as the middle man. i don't think the existing politicians even know what's coming. whether intended or not, what was once a conspiracy theory is quickly becoming reality: the eu is the political descendant of the third reich and behaving more and more that way every year.
http://fpif.org/greatest-threat-europe/
http://fpif.org/military-humanitarian-intervention-shock-doctrine-applied-syria/
http://fpif.org/venezuela-protests-view-west-caracas/
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2014/01/14/gag_order
http://complex.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2014/02/01/exclusive_new_investigator_probes_alleged_marine_corps_cover-up
http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2014/02/05/irans_censors_just_tried_to_muzzle_hassan_rouhani
http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/01/04/camb-j04.html
http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/01/04/pove-j04.html
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/01/09/obam-j09.html
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/01/09/pers-j09.html
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/01/09/iran-j09.html
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/01/11/jobs-j11.html
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2014/03/06/the_presidents_man
http://on.rt.com/y5e40w
http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/03/06/ukraine-through-the-fog-of-the-presstitutes/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2R7chF70UTw
http://bitly.com/1mQvh6p
http://on.rt.com/zq8occ
http://en.ria.ru/russia/20140307/188197242/Russia-Warns-US-Sanctions-Would-Have-Boomerang-Effect.html
http://on.rt.com/yx4zrx
http://www.cnas.org/content/lure-nationalism#.UxjlRvldXvw
http://on.cfr.org/1fW50OF
http://ceasefiremagazine.co.uk/north-london-council-evict-1500-tenants-unauthorised-living-industrial-warehouses/
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2014/03/04/islamic_front_isis_syria
http://blogs.cfr.org/asia/2014/03/03/doctors-without-borders-kicked-out-of-myanmar-hatred-rising/?cid=soc-facebook-in-doctors_without_borders_kicked_out_of_myanmar_hatred_rising-030314
http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2014/03/03/germany_and_us_diverge_over_russia_sanctions
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2014/03/07/obama_is_more_eisenhower_than_carter_putin_crimea
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2014/03/07/people-havent-left-kievs-maidan-heres-what-it-looks-and-feels-like-now/
http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/03/07/crimea-this-time/
http://en.ria.ru/world/20140307/188188127/Russias-Gazprom-Warns-Ukraine-of-New-Gas-War.html
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/03/07/ukra-m07.html
http://fpif.org/saving-blue-future/
http://fpif.org/behind-karzais-stubbornness/
http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/03/05/ukraine-and-the-great-asian-enclosure/
http://on.rt.com/7l2or9
http://on.rt.com/z1i9bg
http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/03/04/crimea-river/
http://www.fpri.org/articles/2014/03/ukraine-and-misunderstood-budapest-memorandum
http://www.euronews.com/2014/03/07/china-rejects-sanctions-as-a-way-to-resolve-ukraine-crisis/
http://indrus.in/blogs/2014/03/06/why_a_militarily_powerful_russia_is_good_for_the_world_33561.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/henry-kissinger-to-settle-the-ukraine-crisis-start-at-the-end/2014/03/05/46dad868-a496-11e3-8466-d34c451760b9_story.html
http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/01/30/the-politics-of-starvation-in-syria/
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/03/03/kaza-m03.html
http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/03/03/ukraine-intervention-and-americas-doublethink/
http://on.rt.com/k1bkw8
http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/03/03/the-dark-side-of-the-ukraine-revolt/
http://rt.com/news/syria-saudi-missiles-russia-741/
http://wapo.st/1icrLBd
http://en.trend.az/news/incident/2249083.html
http://www.themoscowtimes.com/business/article/who-does-putin-want-as-ukrainian-president/495810.html
http://www.kyivpost.com/content/politics/yatseniuk-ukraine-to-sign-deal-with-eu-within-weeks-338707.html
http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/12/31/profits-may-rise-profits-may-fall-the-capitalist-system-doesnt-care-at-all/
http://fpif.org/u-s-continues-stand-bahrain/
http://fpif.org/open-fire-open-markets-asia-pacific-pivot-trans-pacific-partnership/
http://fpif.org/al-qaeda-seizure-falluja-throws-u-s-attitudes-toward-iraq-sharp-relief/
http://fpif.org/sun-also-rises-resisting-militarism-japan/
http://fpif.org/netanyahu-vs-spooks/
http://fpif.org/thailands-deep-divide/
http://fpif.org/united-nations-description-burmas-rohingya-friendless-true/
http://fpif.org/asia-pacific-pivot-smoke-firepower/
http://fpif.org/thailands-protests-global-economy/
http://fpif.org/color-wars/
http://fpif.org/will-gulf-cooperation-council-react-u-s-iran-nuclear-deal/
http://fpif.org/riding-u-s-iran-nuclear-rollercoaster/
http://fpif.org/abe-road/
as i think more about this, i'm beginning to realize that europe's non-reaction to the right-wing elements in the ukrainian parliament is a functioning of the normalization of far right politics in eastern europe. essentially every country in western europe, even, has a politically measurable far right party. well, they said the eec was put together by ex-nazis from the start. and as time has gone on, the same coalition between politics and banks has developed, even if the cartel systems have been removed as the middle man. i don't think the existing politicians even know what's coming. whether intended or not, what was once a conspiracy theory is quickly becoming reality: the eu is the political descendant of the third reich and behaving more and more that way every year.
http://fpif.org/greatest-threat-europe/
http://fpif.org/military-humanitarian-intervention-shock-doctrine-applied-syria/
http://fpif.org/venezuela-protests-view-west-caracas/
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2014/01/14/gag_order
http://complex.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2014/02/01/exclusive_new_investigator_probes_alleged_marine_corps_cover-up
http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2014/02/05/irans_censors_just_tried_to_muzzle_hassan_rouhani
http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/01/04/camb-j04.html
http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/01/04/pove-j04.html
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/01/09/obam-j09.html
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/01/09/pers-j09.html
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/01/09/iran-j09.html
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/01/11/jobs-j11.html
yes. spectacularly.
http://fpif.org/nonviolence-fail-egypt/
the article doesn't get the point, though, that if they want any long term success then the masses of people should be focusing on building new economic relationships, seizing productive capacities for the people, etc rather than recreating the perpetual disappointment and failure that is parliamentary democracy.
the better conclusion is that movements must be spontaneous, focused on changing living conditions outside of government structures and constantly vigilant against co-option from political forces. there was a critical mass assembled in egypt. had they stormed the factories and the fields instead of the parliament, they might have actually accomplished something.
http://fpif.org/nonviolence-fail-egypt/
the article doesn't get the point, though, that if they want any long term success then the masses of people should be focusing on building new economic relationships, seizing productive capacities for the people, etc rather than recreating the perpetual disappointment and failure that is parliamentary democracy.
the better conclusion is that movements must be spontaneous, focused on changing living conditions outside of government structures and constantly vigilant against co-option from political forces. there was a critical mass assembled in egypt. had they stormed the factories and the fields instead of the parliament, they might have actually accomplished something.
hrmmn.
or maybe keynesian war spending might do wonders for russia.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/condoleezza-rice-will-america-heed-the-wake-up-call-of-ukraine/2014/03/07/cf087f74-a630-11e3-84d4-e59b1709222c_story.html
or maybe keynesian war spending might do wonders for russia.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/condoleezza-rice-will-america-heed-the-wake-up-call-of-ukraine/2014/03/07/cf087f74-a630-11e3-84d4-e59b1709222c_story.html
Kiev must have no participation in any anti-Moscow alliance, writes Zbigniew Brzezinski
As chaos explodes in Ukraine and the threat of Russian intervention persists, the responsibility of the west to help attain a constructive outcome becomes more self-evident.
Viktor Yanukovich has shown himself to be a mendacious schemer, a coward and a thief. His palatial personal residence in an impoverished country speaks for itself. Russia’s President Vladimir Putin would be making a fatal mistake by backing him.
But Russia can still plunge Ukraine into a destructive and internationally dangerous civil war. It can prompt and then support the secession of Crimea and some of the industrial eastern portions of the country.
Mr Putin may choose to ignore the fact that such aggression would guarantee the enduring hatred of Russia by the majority of Ukrainians, irrespective of the short-run outcome of any civil war abetted by Moscow.
That in turn would also mean his nostalgic dream of heading a Russian “Eurasian Union” would be exposed as an enterprise based on intimidation and coercion – not exactly an attractive vision for any of the recently sovereign components of the former Soviet Union.
It is probable Ukrainian national self-assertion is already fortifying the post-Soviet republics of central Asia, notably Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan, to stiffen resistance to Moscow’s continuing effort to deprive them of sovereignty. The newly assertive and increasingly nationalistic political and business elites of these states have no desire again to become part of a Russian empire named by Mr Putin the “Eurasian Union”.
The west, however, needs to play a constructive role in forestalling the potential explosion of regional violence in Ukraine abetted from Russia. That will take concerted action by the US and the EU.
The US could and should convey clearly to Mr Putin that it is prepared to use its influence to make certain a truly independent and territorially undivided Ukraine will pursue policies towards Russia similar to those so effectively practised by Finland: mutually respectful neighbours with wide-ranging economic relations with Russia and the EU; no participation in any military alliance viewed by Moscow as directed at itself but expanding its European connectivity.
In brief, the Finnish model is ideal for Ukraine, the EU and Russia in any larger east-west strategic accommodation.
But to be credible to the Kremlin, the US needs also to spell out privately that attempts to destabilise the emerging democracy in Kiev or detach parts of Ukraine – not to mention even overt or covert Russian participation in its neighbour’s domestic conflicts – would compel Washington to use its influence internationally to prompt steps that would be economically costly to Moscow.
Options to that effect can range from unilateral individual and state-to-state financial sanctions to a review of Russia’s status in the World Trade Organisation, the World Bank and the Group of Eight leading industrial nations.
Obviously, the EU would need to be a solid partner in any such effort, since it is a significant trader with Russia. Contemporary Russia is not economically invulnerable to the consequences.
But even more urgent is the need for the EU to formulate a significant financial emergency package for Ukraine. Otherwise, the country will plunge into destructive financial chaos.
The lead in Europe should be taken by Germany and the UK. The latter’s role as a haven for Russian and Ukrainian financial oligarchs gives London special leverage. But every EU country should make some sacrifice in an effort to avert a potentially catastrophic Ukrainian economic collapse.
The Europeans and especially the UK might be more inclined to undertake such a collective effort if the top 10 Ukrainian oligarchs ¬– principal beneficiaries of the country’s stunningly widespread corruption – were all “persuaded” to donate $1bn each to their country’s financial rehabilitation.
Mr Yanukovich’s fabulously wealthy dentist son should be able to match the resulting $10bn. The Ukrainian public would certainly welcome such a collective contribution.
Obviously the US and the EU, hopefully with Russia’s constructive co-operation, should continue to press the dominant democratic forces in Kiev to adopt a stance not of revenge and retribution but of national unification and political moderation. That is achievable given the crucial leaders who emerged in Maidan Square are moderates.
Irrespective of what happens in the near future, I continue to believe that sooner rather than later Ukraine will be truly a part of democratic Europe. Later rather than sooner, Russia will follow unless it isolates itself and becomes a semi-stagnant imperialistic relic.
The writer was national security adviser to US president Jimmy Carter and wrote ‘Strategic Vision: America and the Crisis of Global Power’
As chaos explodes in Ukraine and the threat of Russian intervention persists, the responsibility of the west to help attain a constructive outcome becomes more self-evident.
Viktor Yanukovich has shown himself to be a mendacious schemer, a coward and a thief. His palatial personal residence in an impoverished country speaks for itself. Russia’s President Vladimir Putin would be making a fatal mistake by backing him.
But Russia can still plunge Ukraine into a destructive and internationally dangerous civil war. It can prompt and then support the secession of Crimea and some of the industrial eastern portions of the country.
Mr Putin may choose to ignore the fact that such aggression would guarantee the enduring hatred of Russia by the majority of Ukrainians, irrespective of the short-run outcome of any civil war abetted by Moscow.
That in turn would also mean his nostalgic dream of heading a Russian “Eurasian Union” would be exposed as an enterprise based on intimidation and coercion – not exactly an attractive vision for any of the recently sovereign components of the former Soviet Union.
It is probable Ukrainian national self-assertion is already fortifying the post-Soviet republics of central Asia, notably Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan, to stiffen resistance to Moscow’s continuing effort to deprive them of sovereignty. The newly assertive and increasingly nationalistic political and business elites of these states have no desire again to become part of a Russian empire named by Mr Putin the “Eurasian Union”.
The west, however, needs to play a constructive role in forestalling the potential explosion of regional violence in Ukraine abetted from Russia. That will take concerted action by the US and the EU.
The US could and should convey clearly to Mr Putin that it is prepared to use its influence to make certain a truly independent and territorially undivided Ukraine will pursue policies towards Russia similar to those so effectively practised by Finland: mutually respectful neighbours with wide-ranging economic relations with Russia and the EU; no participation in any military alliance viewed by Moscow as directed at itself but expanding its European connectivity.
In brief, the Finnish model is ideal for Ukraine, the EU and Russia in any larger east-west strategic accommodation.
But to be credible to the Kremlin, the US needs also to spell out privately that attempts to destabilise the emerging democracy in Kiev or detach parts of Ukraine – not to mention even overt or covert Russian participation in its neighbour’s domestic conflicts – would compel Washington to use its influence internationally to prompt steps that would be economically costly to Moscow.
Options to that effect can range from unilateral individual and state-to-state financial sanctions to a review of Russia’s status in the World Trade Organisation, the World Bank and the Group of Eight leading industrial nations.
Obviously, the EU would need to be a solid partner in any such effort, since it is a significant trader with Russia. Contemporary Russia is not economically invulnerable to the consequences.
But even more urgent is the need for the EU to formulate a significant financial emergency package for Ukraine. Otherwise, the country will plunge into destructive financial chaos.
The lead in Europe should be taken by Germany and the UK. The latter’s role as a haven for Russian and Ukrainian financial oligarchs gives London special leverage. But every EU country should make some sacrifice in an effort to avert a potentially catastrophic Ukrainian economic collapse.
The Europeans and especially the UK might be more inclined to undertake such a collective effort if the top 10 Ukrainian oligarchs ¬– principal beneficiaries of the country’s stunningly widespread corruption – were all “persuaded” to donate $1bn each to their country’s financial rehabilitation.
Mr Yanukovich’s fabulously wealthy dentist son should be able to match the resulting $10bn. The Ukrainian public would certainly welcome such a collective contribution.
Obviously the US and the EU, hopefully with Russia’s constructive co-operation, should continue to press the dominant democratic forces in Kiev to adopt a stance not of revenge and retribution but of national unification and political moderation. That is achievable given the crucial leaders who emerged in Maidan Square are moderates.
Irrespective of what happens in the near future, I continue to believe that sooner rather than later Ukraine will be truly a part of democratic Europe. Later rather than sooner, Russia will follow unless it isolates itself and becomes a semi-stagnant imperialistic relic.
The writer was national security adviser to US president Jimmy Carter and wrote ‘Strategic Vision: America and the Crisis of Global Power’
that cia deal bezos whipped up has got his paper pulling in all the decision makers.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/zbigniew-brzezinski-after-putins-aggression-in-ukraine-the-west-must-be-ready-to-respond/2014/03/03/25b3f928-a2f5-11e3-84d4-e59b1709222c_story.html
free media my ass...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/zbigniew-brzezinski-after-putins-aggression-in-ukraine-the-west-must-be-ready-to-respond/2014/03/03/25b3f928-a2f5-11e3-84d4-e59b1709222c_story.html
free media my ass...
israeli colonization of the region has made this the only option. there isn't a palestine left to form a state with....
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2014/03/02/america_plan_israel_two_state
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2014/03/02/america_plan_israel_two_state
Friday, March 7, 2014
deathtokoalas
so, let me get this straight. this "protestor" (who looks a little too old to be a grad student) is reporting from university college in london in order to repeat what is essentially exactly the state department's precise thinking on the matter. convenient. can he prove he was even in ukraine at all? 'cause i have to say i'm skeptical.
interesting that this is a "roundtable". how far is that from all souls, anyways?
c'mon, guys. you're usually better than this.
Daniel Jones
He pricesly said "I wouldnt exactly read too much in the call". Which is the CNN position and of course Obama's and Cameron's - by default of not even acknowledging the existence of the call.
Sobakus
Even if we suppose you're right, this guy still represents a particular point of view, which is what this programme is about.
deathtokoalas
but, does he represent anybody on the ground, like he claims to?
the media has been presenting the debate as between opposition and government forces (as they were a few weeks ago), as though the then opposition assembled the protestors and consequently represents their interests. however, the then opposition really represents a faction of the ukrainian ruling elite that took advantage of the protest movement to seize power and is now pushing through unpopular reform packages from nato, the eu and the imf. it's looking more and more like a classic "shock doctrine" approach to taking advantage of a manufactured crisis. the people did not assemble to have imf austerity packages rammed through a rump parliament! they were concerned about the kind of corruption endemic to both mainstream parties.
could you imagine the media presenting occupy protestors as representing the interests of the democratic party?
there's been almost total media silence as to who the protestors actually are and what they actually want. this guy reporting from london and stating state department demands isn't helping clarify that distinction between the protestors and the elite, but muddying it.
so, let me get this straight. this "protestor" (who looks a little too old to be a grad student) is reporting from university college in london in order to repeat what is essentially exactly the state department's precise thinking on the matter. convenient. can he prove he was even in ukraine at all? 'cause i have to say i'm skeptical.
interesting that this is a "roundtable". how far is that from all souls, anyways?
c'mon, guys. you're usually better than this.
Daniel Jones
He pricesly said "I wouldnt exactly read too much in the call". Which is the CNN position and of course Obama's and Cameron's - by default of not even acknowledging the existence of the call.
Sobakus
Even if we suppose you're right, this guy still represents a particular point of view, which is what this programme is about.
deathtokoalas
but, does he represent anybody on the ground, like he claims to?
the media has been presenting the debate as between opposition and government forces (as they were a few weeks ago), as though the then opposition assembled the protestors and consequently represents their interests. however, the then opposition really represents a faction of the ukrainian ruling elite that took advantage of the protest movement to seize power and is now pushing through unpopular reform packages from nato, the eu and the imf. it's looking more and more like a classic "shock doctrine" approach to taking advantage of a manufactured crisis. the people did not assemble to have imf austerity packages rammed through a rump parliament! they were concerned about the kind of corruption endemic to both mainstream parties.
could you imagine the media presenting occupy protestors as representing the interests of the democratic party?
there's been almost total media silence as to who the protestors actually are and what they actually want. this guy reporting from london and stating state department demands isn't helping clarify that distinction between the protestors and the elite, but muddying it.
uploading footage of an occupy fundraiser from last year to youtube
shredding a little at an occupy ottawa fundraiser, in the summer of 2012. this is the most stripped down version possible of the second and third movements of symphony #9. which is an "industrial grunge opera".
recorded first movement of the piece:
http://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/proverbs
full version of fundraiser:
https://vimeo.com/45641874
the most important things i learned from occupy are:
1) people that share a dissatisfaction with the world as it is do not necessarily form a shared vision of how they'd like to see the world.
2) capitalist indoctrination is far deeper than many anti-capitalists consciously realize.
3) a tendency to throw temper tantrums is not necessarily something people grow out of.
4) at the end of the day, the revolution can only ever be in the mode of production.
5) hippies don't like challenging music
but, despite the substantial challenges ahead of all of us, it's important that we continue to take the time to speak out against fucking bullshit.
recorded first movement of the piece:
http://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/proverbs
full version of fundraiser:
https://vimeo.com/45641874
the most important things i learned from occupy are:
1) people that share a dissatisfaction with the world as it is do not necessarily form a shared vision of how they'd like to see the world.
2) capitalist indoctrination is far deeper than many anti-capitalists consciously realize.
3) a tendency to throw temper tantrums is not necessarily something people grow out of.
4) at the end of the day, the revolution can only ever be in the mode of production.
5) hippies don't like challenging music
but, despite the substantial challenges ahead of all of us, it's important that we continue to take the time to speak out against fucking bullshit.
i know the russian mindset towards strong leaders is different. but this article is both the reason i read fp and a good example of flat out propaganda.
putin is a least evil in russia. i keep trying to explain this to people. if a better option appeared in russia, there's little doubt that the masses would swing to it. but, that's not the reality in the country.
the scariest thing about russia in a geopolitical context is it's political spectrum. with all the talk of extremists in ukraine, it's important to realize that russia is under perpetual threat of being taken over by lunatics. still, in 2014, the largest opposition party remains the communist party. leap frogging the third place social democrats (which are the only really moderate party in the country), the fourth place party is a collection of hard-right nationalists that call themselves various type of liberals. what that means is that russia is torn between extreme opposition movements on the far left and the far right, both of which are large enough to form a serious threat should the ruling coalition of liberals and conservatives fracture.
that makes putin a centrist in russia, and that is the basis of his continuing political support. in western terms, he's an old timey conservative in the mold of somebody like churchill, which means he supports a kind of state capitalism in conjunction with a welfare state and a type of social conservatism that is globally fairly normal, if somewhat fringe in europe and north america. that's not a formula for what most westerners would consider enlightened governance in 2014. and , yeah, corruption is endemic. but it's a far cry from the soviets and quasi-fascists that form the only other viable political parties in the country.
and he's not in a vacuum, either. he does have political concerns to be worried about.
something struck me when watching the news conference the other day. in speaking of the divide in wealth in ukraine, he skipped the communists. he talked about the leaders of modern ukraine, then jumped right to the czar. i haven't seen a western analysis of this yet, but it's telling. he needs to be careful not to provoke a conflict with the communist opposition, because he knows that's an argument that could cause some problems.
the ngos that the americans fund in russia aren't helping to remove putin, either, but solidifying his base of support. they're funding the same kind of hard-right opposition movements, which just plays into putin's narrative of not letting the country fall into the hands of extremists on the left or right. it's scary to think that something similar could happen in moscow, but if it could it would have the same effect of a broad rejection by the russian populace. it is obvious that, if elections are fair, the existing government in ukraine is going to be drastically redrawn in upcoming elections. at this point, removing putin by force would probably get the communists elected.
so, is there unease in russia about the kleptocracy? as far as i can see, there is, and it's substantial. but the article doesn't answer the question of who putin is afraid of replacing him - because there isn't anybody that currently could. so long as the americans back the far right, and the soviets remain a strong opposition, the masses of russian people have no option but to continue to vote for putin's centrist coalition.
so, rumours of his demise are greatly exaggerated.
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2014/03/06/the_frontlines_on_russia_homefront_putin_ukraine
that being said, i agree his hands were tied. but it's about strategic positioning, not local politics.
i mean....
if the ghost of churchill were to run for prime minister tomorrow, he'd probably be written off as a fascist.
he might even join the bnp.
putin is a least evil in russia. i keep trying to explain this to people. if a better option appeared in russia, there's little doubt that the masses would swing to it. but, that's not the reality in the country.
the scariest thing about russia in a geopolitical context is it's political spectrum. with all the talk of extremists in ukraine, it's important to realize that russia is under perpetual threat of being taken over by lunatics. still, in 2014, the largest opposition party remains the communist party. leap frogging the third place social democrats (which are the only really moderate party in the country), the fourth place party is a collection of hard-right nationalists that call themselves various type of liberals. what that means is that russia is torn between extreme opposition movements on the far left and the far right, both of which are large enough to form a serious threat should the ruling coalition of liberals and conservatives fracture.
that makes putin a centrist in russia, and that is the basis of his continuing political support. in western terms, he's an old timey conservative in the mold of somebody like churchill, which means he supports a kind of state capitalism in conjunction with a welfare state and a type of social conservatism that is globally fairly normal, if somewhat fringe in europe and north america. that's not a formula for what most westerners would consider enlightened governance in 2014. and , yeah, corruption is endemic. but it's a far cry from the soviets and quasi-fascists that form the only other viable political parties in the country.
and he's not in a vacuum, either. he does have political concerns to be worried about.
something struck me when watching the news conference the other day. in speaking of the divide in wealth in ukraine, he skipped the communists. he talked about the leaders of modern ukraine, then jumped right to the czar. i haven't seen a western analysis of this yet, but it's telling. he needs to be careful not to provoke a conflict with the communist opposition, because he knows that's an argument that could cause some problems.
the ngos that the americans fund in russia aren't helping to remove putin, either, but solidifying his base of support. they're funding the same kind of hard-right opposition movements, which just plays into putin's narrative of not letting the country fall into the hands of extremists on the left or right. it's scary to think that something similar could happen in moscow, but if it could it would have the same effect of a broad rejection by the russian populace. it is obvious that, if elections are fair, the existing government in ukraine is going to be drastically redrawn in upcoming elections. at this point, removing putin by force would probably get the communists elected.
so, is there unease in russia about the kleptocracy? as far as i can see, there is, and it's substantial. but the article doesn't answer the question of who putin is afraid of replacing him - because there isn't anybody that currently could. so long as the americans back the far right, and the soviets remain a strong opposition, the masses of russian people have no option but to continue to vote for putin's centrist coalition.
so, rumours of his demise are greatly exaggerated.
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2014/03/06/the_frontlines_on_russia_homefront_putin_ukraine
that being said, i agree his hands were tied. but it's about strategic positioning, not local politics.
i mean....
if the ghost of churchill were to run for prime minister tomorrow, he'd probably be written off as a fascist.
he might even join the bnp.
well, they said they weren't going to annex it. weird, though.
al jazeera's often not the best source for getting the whole picture. there's no doubt something missing. let's see what the russians say.
nothing as of yet, it seems. just a lot of talk of russia possibly accepting a crimean vote to join the russian federation.
technically, allowing crimea into the russian federation is not invading it. but the force in which the kremlin's spokespeople were rejecting any attempt to sway crimea into russia is not consistent with that kind of policy.
they were very clear on upholding ukrainian sovereignty over the region, while supporting more autonomy.
so, this is either a shift in policy or the collapse of a story that was constructed for western consumption.
it's probably a bit of both.
either way, they lost some credibility with me.
i mean, it's not entirely surprising, but there's a difference between creating propaganda about *why* they're doing something and lying about what they're doing. i've been operating under the perception that while their justifications are usually fabricated, they've been mostly up front about what they're actually doing.
meaning that "we're protecting russians" is obvious bullshit, but "we're not annexing the region" isn't. that may seem subtle, but it's a big difference. it's what v why.
i think it's mostly an extrapolation of how i deal with american propaganda. when the americans indicate they're going after a region - be it iraq or syria or iran - they almost never bluff. you can figure out *what* they're doing pretty easily, by taking their statements at face value. it's the *why* that's usually nonsense and requires a lot of deconstruction.
i don't know how the russians expect anybody to take them seriously when they stand up and say they're doing a thing, and then do the exact opposite. even the americans know not to kill their own credibility like that.
i'm not very forgiving when it comes to this kind of thing. there's still time for a more subtle russian explanation. but, as of right now, they just lost credibility in my mind.
al jazeera's often not the best source for getting the whole picture. there's no doubt something missing. let's see what the russians say.
nothing as of yet, it seems. just a lot of talk of russia possibly accepting a crimean vote to join the russian federation.
technically, allowing crimea into the russian federation is not invading it. but the force in which the kremlin's spokespeople were rejecting any attempt to sway crimea into russia is not consistent with that kind of policy.
they were very clear on upholding ukrainian sovereignty over the region, while supporting more autonomy.
so, this is either a shift in policy or the collapse of a story that was constructed for western consumption.
it's probably a bit of both.
either way, they lost some credibility with me.
i mean, it's not entirely surprising, but there's a difference between creating propaganda about *why* they're doing something and lying about what they're doing. i've been operating under the perception that while their justifications are usually fabricated, they've been mostly up front about what they're actually doing.
meaning that "we're protecting russians" is obvious bullshit, but "we're not annexing the region" isn't. that may seem subtle, but it's a big difference. it's what v why.
i think it's mostly an extrapolation of how i deal with american propaganda. when the americans indicate they're going after a region - be it iraq or syria or iran - they almost never bluff. you can figure out *what* they're doing pretty easily, by taking their statements at face value. it's the *why* that's usually nonsense and requires a lot of deconstruction.
i don't know how the russians expect anybody to take them seriously when they stand up and say they're doing a thing, and then do the exact opposite. even the americans know not to kill their own credibility like that.
i'm not very forgiving when it comes to this kind of thing. there's still time for a more subtle russian explanation. but, as of right now, they just lost credibility in my mind.
stuck in the middle of an alley closing in on all sides (vst mix) (original upload)
written in early 2001. initially rendered mar 6, 2014. corrected on mar 7, 2014.
http://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/vst-mix
http://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/vst-mix
Thursday, March 6, 2014
watching all this rt, i really have to say that you simply don't see smart, articulate, informed women able to aggressively argue their points of view anywhere else in the media.
i mean, i've been watching amy goodman for years, but she doesn't grab a hold of the conversation like that. not to mention the plastic models/anchorwomen that dominate most of the news media.
for all it's faults, it seems like that's something communism got right.
i mean, i've been watching amy goodman for years, but she doesn't grab a hold of the conversation like that. not to mention the plastic models/anchorwomen that dominate most of the news media.
for all it's faults, it seems like that's something communism got right.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/giant-virus-resurrected-from-30000-year-old-ice/
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/03/05/ford-m05.html
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2014/03/04/welcome_to_cold_war_ii
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Knr6VrREZbk
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/03/06/ukra-m06.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZJVi4pFwfE
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/03/05/ford-m05.html
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2014/03/04/welcome_to_cold_war_ii
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Knr6VrREZbk
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/03/06/ukra-m06.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZJVi4pFwfE
again: i'm sure those imf policies are going to be popular.
things are going to be different after the election, which is between german and russian backed factions. this faction the americans are backing is dead in the water.
unless they rig and/or refuse to acknowledge the results of the election. but, the protesters aren't likely to roll over and allow that.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AxUSb3Hd2oQ
things are going to be different after the election, which is between german and russian backed factions. this faction the americans are backing is dead in the water.
unless they rig and/or refuse to acknowledge the results of the election. but, the protesters aren't likely to roll over and allow that.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AxUSb3Hd2oQ
moronic cpc policy designed to appeal to the 905.
it might work.
rip ndp.
https://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark/2014/03/05/wynne_rejects_ndps_100_rebate_scheme.html
it might work.
rip ndp.
https://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark/2014/03/05/wynne_rejects_ndps_100_rebate_scheme.html
yeah. this seems like it is actually an annoyance from the russian perspective. the russians have sent their guys on tv shows all over the world saying that crimea is a part of ukraine. they would lose all credibility if they reversed their position. and as she mentioned it opens a can of worms regarding a number of other regions.
a parliamentary vote isn't a plebiscite, either.
i can't see them accepting it....
did you know that jamaica has repeatedly voted to join canada?
a parliamentary vote isn't a plebiscite, either.
i can't see them accepting it....
did you know that jamaica has repeatedly voted to join canada?
the security council wasn't created to facilitate armed intervention, it was created to alleviate tensions that could lead to violence.
unfortunately, the result is that that means that things happen in secret.
but do i think it's a good idea to make it easier for the united nations to act with force? absofuckinglutely not!
it's remarkable. they're beginning with the assumption that the un is meant to be a global governing body and is failing because it lacks that kind of power.
that's not remotely what the un was for or should be.
when russia vetoes an american strike on syria, that's the security council succeeding in it's intended purpose of preventing the escalation of existing conflicts.
unfortunately, the result is that that means that things happen in secret.
but do i think it's a good idea to make it easier for the united nations to act with force? absofuckinglutely not!
it's remarkable. they're beginning with the assumption that the un is meant to be a global governing body and is failing because it lacks that kind of power.
that's not remotely what the un was for or should be.
when russia vetoes an american strike on syria, that's the security council succeeding in it's intended purpose of preventing the escalation of existing conflicts.
this must be an error. tories can't want people with stronger numeracy. they might read one of their budgets...
https://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark/2014/03/05/give_math_teachers_incentive_pay_ontario_conservatives_say.html
in all seriousness, it makes no sense at all to think that you can increase test scores by providing incentives to teachers.
see, teachers don't write tests.
students write tests.
increasing test scores consequently has nothing to do with teachers and everything to do with students.
it follows that if you want to provide incentives to anybody and have it work, there should be incentives for students.
but incentive systems don't work anyways, so it doesn't matter.
i mean, honestly, though - there somehow exist these people that think that the "quality" of teachers somehow affects tests scores. you know what's behind this? it's that stupid michelle pfeiffer movie.
the one where the rich white woman goes to the slums and magically makes the brown kids care more.
see, and that's the absurdity - the idea that students are lazy and simply need to be managed better.
...rather than the truth, which is that students are stupid because their parents raised them on television and junk food....
...and the reality that nothing's going to change them except themselves.
better idea? fire the teachers, hire babysitters and make the kids figure it out on their own.
https://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark/2014/03/05/give_math_teachers_incentive_pay_ontario_conservatives_say.html
in all seriousness, it makes no sense at all to think that you can increase test scores by providing incentives to teachers.
see, teachers don't write tests.
students write tests.
increasing test scores consequently has nothing to do with teachers and everything to do with students.
it follows that if you want to provide incentives to anybody and have it work, there should be incentives for students.
but incentive systems don't work anyways, so it doesn't matter.
i mean, honestly, though - there somehow exist these people that think that the "quality" of teachers somehow affects tests scores. you know what's behind this? it's that stupid michelle pfeiffer movie.
the one where the rich white woman goes to the slums and magically makes the brown kids care more.
see, and that's the absurdity - the idea that students are lazy and simply need to be managed better.
...rather than the truth, which is that students are stupid because their parents raised them on television and junk food....
...and the reality that nothing's going to change them except themselves.
better idea? fire the teachers, hire babysitters and make the kids figure it out on their own.
uploading a tentative vst version of stuck in the middle of an alley closing in on all sides
i'll probably revisit this, but i'm uploading it as is for now.
in addition to being the core of what will be the finished track, it's interesting to point out just how good computer music can sound nowadays. excluding the introduction, i didn't play a single note in this song. the guitars are all played through midi-based vst instruments and put into digital amp models and digital effects emulators. it's really rather remarkable how far the technology has come....
written in early 2001. initially rendered mar 6, 2014.
http://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/vst-mix
in addition to being the core of what will be the finished track, it's interesting to point out just how good computer music can sound nowadays. excluding the introduction, i didn't play a single note in this song. the guitars are all played through midi-based vst instruments and put into digital amp models and digital effects emulators. it's really rather remarkable how far the technology has come....
written in early 2001. initially rendered mar 6, 2014.
http://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/vst-mix
i don't mind walking to the post office the twice a year that i get mail i care about.
but there's five people in my building and ten in the one beside me. it seems kind of stupid to put a box halfway between when the mail person is there anyways. wasteful, even.
i don't think they're going far enough. if this is their half-baked plan? i suspect urban delivery will continue.
https://www.thestar.com/business/2014/03/04/canada_post_unveils_new_community_mailbox_design.html
but there's five people in my building and ten in the one beside me. it seems kind of stupid to put a box halfway between when the mail person is there anyways. wasteful, even.
i don't think they're going far enough. if this is their half-baked plan? i suspect urban delivery will continue.
https://www.thestar.com/business/2014/03/04/canada_post_unveils_new_community_mailbox_design.html
Wednesday, March 5, 2014
"We're not going to let anyone get away with interfering with our fatherland, you despicable lackey, president of Panama,” said Maduro.
that's right. panama.
remember when the leader of venezuela waved around chomsky and deconstructed american foreign policy in lengthy state addresses?
no more of that nonsense. the new leader of venezuela has taught us who the real threat to global stability is: panama.
despicable, indeed.
(in other news, my ass is informing me that maduro has entered into an agreement with the state department that sees him maintain power as an american-backed fascist dictator in return for promising not to wave around chomsky and deconstruct american foreign policy.)
that's just how the world works, kids.
also, word has it that david lee roth is now indefinitely banned from venezuela for his anti-revolutionary art.
^ that is the only possible excuse for ever, ever, ever posting van halen anywhere.
"Panama only hopes that this brother nation finds peace and strengthens its democracy," - the "astonished" president of panama
unless....
venezuela couldn't possibly be thinking of invading panama could it?
that would wreak some havoc.
a man, a plan...one of those funny hats?
-------------
geez, he could have at least blamed the california girls.
that's a step down in quality of nemesis, nicolas. hugo got to fight the americans. you're getting picked on by panama? what did you get in return for toning down on the anti-americanism?
next week, it'll be cuba.
ps: i always knew david lee roth was a mason.
http://rt.com/news/venezuela-breaks-relations-panama-026/
maduro had sell out on his forehead from day one.
unfortunately, this could get ugly.
uglier than this, even.
i know, that's an unwholesome thought. but i kind of assumed that when maduro became dictator it would be isolationist. dictators that play nice with the americans are always bad news.
that's right. panama.
remember when the leader of venezuela waved around chomsky and deconstructed american foreign policy in lengthy state addresses?
no more of that nonsense. the new leader of venezuela has taught us who the real threat to global stability is: panama.
despicable, indeed.
(in other news, my ass is informing me that maduro has entered into an agreement with the state department that sees him maintain power as an american-backed fascist dictator in return for promising not to wave around chomsky and deconstruct american foreign policy.)
that's just how the world works, kids.
also, word has it that david lee roth is now indefinitely banned from venezuela for his anti-revolutionary art.
^ that is the only possible excuse for ever, ever, ever posting van halen anywhere.
"Panama only hopes that this brother nation finds peace and strengthens its democracy," - the "astonished" president of panama
unless....
venezuela couldn't possibly be thinking of invading panama could it?
that would wreak some havoc.
a man, a plan...one of those funny hats?
-------------
geez, he could have at least blamed the california girls.
that's a step down in quality of nemesis, nicolas. hugo got to fight the americans. you're getting picked on by panama? what did you get in return for toning down on the anti-americanism?
next week, it'll be cuba.
ps: i always knew david lee roth was a mason.
http://rt.com/news/venezuela-breaks-relations-panama-026/
maduro had sell out on his forehead from day one.
unfortunately, this could get ugly.
uglier than this, even.
i know, that's an unwholesome thought. but i kind of assumed that when maduro became dictator it would be isolationist. dictators that play nice with the americans are always bad news.
well, what did you want them to do?
invite the us marines into the crimean base?
http://en.ria.ru/russia/20140305/188114816/Russia-Spent-11Bln-on-Propping-Ruble-Amid-Conflict-Fears.html
invite the us marines into the crimean base?
http://en.ria.ru/russia/20140305/188114816/Russia-Spent-11Bln-on-Propping-Ruble-Amid-Conflict-Fears.html
ok, chill out.
world war three didn't start a few weeks ago. world war three started some time in the 90s. it's just easier if you don't know about it.
vladimir putin is a known known, and the truth is that he's a pansy. maybe that's what the macho bullshit exterior is about.
or, at least that's what the americans are counting on, in their attempt to distract him. the goal is syria, and then iran. putin's become an annoyance. maybe he wouldn't be so annoying if he had some problems in his own backyard to worry about.
chechens are notoriously untrustworthy. you gotta bribe 'em over and over. and, in the end, they don't actually give a fuck. but, missile bases in ukraine is enough to get putin to shit in his pants.
you can hear bits of this policy of asserting hegemony with a pair of iron balls in the western media. kerry called russia weak. that's hyperbolic, but he's right. the americans wouldn't be as aggressive, otherwise.
...and they wouldn't be as aggressive if russia was governed by somebody who isn't a pansy.
so, stop worrying about a war. it's not going to happen. putin will give the west what it wants, because he doesn't have the stomach to give the orders.
that's the sick, twisted truth. the americans will squeeze every last drop out. slowly. c'mon, now vlad - they've got you pinned. say uncle.
checkmate in five.
world war three didn't start a few weeks ago. world war three started some time in the 90s. it's just easier if you don't know about it.
vladimir putin is a known known, and the truth is that he's a pansy. maybe that's what the macho bullshit exterior is about.
or, at least that's what the americans are counting on, in their attempt to distract him. the goal is syria, and then iran. putin's become an annoyance. maybe he wouldn't be so annoying if he had some problems in his own backyard to worry about.
chechens are notoriously untrustworthy. you gotta bribe 'em over and over. and, in the end, they don't actually give a fuck. but, missile bases in ukraine is enough to get putin to shit in his pants.
you can hear bits of this policy of asserting hegemony with a pair of iron balls in the western media. kerry called russia weak. that's hyperbolic, but he's right. the americans wouldn't be as aggressive, otherwise.
...and they wouldn't be as aggressive if russia was governed by somebody who isn't a pansy.
so, stop worrying about a war. it's not going to happen. putin will give the west what it wants, because he doesn't have the stomach to give the orders.
that's the sick, twisted truth. the americans will squeeze every last drop out. slowly. c'mon, now vlad - they've got you pinned. say uncle.
checkmate in five.
well, he's right, and of course i agree with him
i've been following rt with the ukrainian issue due to their proximity, but i've previously preferred ria novosti when i've followed russian media at all. the difference is actually substantial. i mean, if i want to know russia's response to nato expansion or developments about the missile shield, i read russian media. that makes sense. it follows that russian media is important in getting a full picture.
so, i do suggest reading russian media. but i don't read - and don't suggest reading - rt uncritically. as i don't suggest reading cnn or al jazeera uncritically. there's huge biases in all these sources. reading them should come with that caveat.
obviously.
with the issue in ukraine? i find their narrative more plausible. it's not perfect. there's a lot of propaganda to break through. i don't think any existing or future russian action is going to be to "protect russian citizens". that's the propaganda. they have strategic aims they will follow. but reading it helps understand what those aims are. and they're relevant in getting what's happening.
but the situation there is outlandish, and the russians are right to freak out about it. it's hard to talk about russia obeying agreements when they're dealing with the armed gunmen storming parliaments. they have a strategic base to protect, and if they're just going to show up with goons and hang out then i have a hard time criticizing them for it. they start killing people, that's a different story.
further, the russians have claimed they have no intent of annexing crimea. i don't see any reason not to believe them. we'll have to see how credible they are in the long run. for now, it seems like a reasonable policy - regardless of the international law that no country in the world pays more than lip service to.
i'm an anarchist...
independent media is useful for analysis, but in the end it's a secondary source. state media - whatever it's flaws - is a primary source. that's a very key difference to observe. so, it's an important tool in the arsenal.
that's all quite secondary to what he's saying here, which is that shit is complex and i again agree is largely correct.
something that's forgotten is that ukrainian media is also state-owned. so, there's not really any good sources here.
if you think the people that just took over in kiev are into free and fair media, you've had some wool pulled over your eyes...
you have to understand that if russia were to lose it's crimean port that would be a shattering shift in global power. that has been the prime russian objective for centuries. it's a huge naval facility. like, if you had the russian military sit down and list the five most strategic areas in the world for them, the crimea would be near the top of the list.
and it's not like the americans don't know that.
so, i'm willing to bend a little. that's something they can't lose. i feel that suggesting otherwise would be very much cheerleading for a pro-nato position.
despite the mostly empty rhetoric about rights and laws.
i'm going to rant a little in a new post...
i've been following rt with the ukrainian issue due to their proximity, but i've previously preferred ria novosti when i've followed russian media at all. the difference is actually substantial. i mean, if i want to know russia's response to nato expansion or developments about the missile shield, i read russian media. that makes sense. it follows that russian media is important in getting a full picture.
so, i do suggest reading russian media. but i don't read - and don't suggest reading - rt uncritically. as i don't suggest reading cnn or al jazeera uncritically. there's huge biases in all these sources. reading them should come with that caveat.
obviously.
with the issue in ukraine? i find their narrative more plausible. it's not perfect. there's a lot of propaganda to break through. i don't think any existing or future russian action is going to be to "protect russian citizens". that's the propaganda. they have strategic aims they will follow. but reading it helps understand what those aims are. and they're relevant in getting what's happening.
but the situation there is outlandish, and the russians are right to freak out about it. it's hard to talk about russia obeying agreements when they're dealing with the armed gunmen storming parliaments. they have a strategic base to protect, and if they're just going to show up with goons and hang out then i have a hard time criticizing them for it. they start killing people, that's a different story.
further, the russians have claimed they have no intent of annexing crimea. i don't see any reason not to believe them. we'll have to see how credible they are in the long run. for now, it seems like a reasonable policy - regardless of the international law that no country in the world pays more than lip service to.
i'm an anarchist...
independent media is useful for analysis, but in the end it's a secondary source. state media - whatever it's flaws - is a primary source. that's a very key difference to observe. so, it's an important tool in the arsenal.
that's all quite secondary to what he's saying here, which is that shit is complex and i again agree is largely correct.
something that's forgotten is that ukrainian media is also state-owned. so, there's not really any good sources here.
if you think the people that just took over in kiev are into free and fair media, you've had some wool pulled over your eyes...
you have to understand that if russia were to lose it's crimean port that would be a shattering shift in global power. that has been the prime russian objective for centuries. it's a huge naval facility. like, if you had the russian military sit down and list the five most strategic areas in the world for them, the crimea would be near the top of the list.
and it's not like the americans don't know that.
so, i'm willing to bend a little. that's something they can't lose. i feel that suggesting otherwise would be very much cheerleading for a pro-nato position.
despite the mostly empty rhetoric about rights and laws.
i'm going to rant a little in a new post...
Tuesday, March 4, 2014
i think chomsky makes some good points here, but a student-run university is something i wouldn't go a mile near. i'm imagining credits for basketball tryouts, and televised nerd stonings. there's this sort of naive optimism that underlies so much of leftist thinking that only makes sense after the society has already changed. maybe things seemed better in the 60s - i can't say - but this kind of thing, nowadays, would be horrifically oppressive and lead to a rapid deterioration of education.
i'm also far more of an individualist than the average leftist. i find anarchism is often an intellectual position that syndicalist style socialists take, out of various historical reasons. people that actually feel and live and breathe anarchism are far rarer.
i'd rather do away with professors altogether by expelling them purely to research. i don't know where this idea that research and teaching ought to be connected comes from, but i think it really ought to be separated. why do we have our brightest minds teaching simple ideas to teenagers? why not just literally give them lobotomies and lock them up in cages?
the problems i had going through school were primarily related to my inability to work well in groups, and my anxiety in social situations. about the only worthwhile thing i learned in high school was that i understand things better reading them out of a book by myself in my bedroom than i do by wasting my time sitting in a classroom. i was told that i would be better suited for the university system because of that greater emphasis on independent learning and critical thought. what i found was the exact opposite, for a few reasons.
the first was profs that would grade you based on attendance. there's two levels to this. the first are the ones that actually make it a part of the grading scheme. so, you get 10 or 15% for just showing up. i'd argue that's preposterous on it's face. but what i found was that i couldn't show up for various reasons that the school wouldn't recognize as valid, and if i did i'd start yelling at people. so, i'd instantly forfeit a tenth or more of the grade. sometimes, i could ace the rest of the course material and get a decent mark. other times, an A became a B or a C because of it, or a B became as low as a D.
and they say it's to inflate the grade? it didn't inflate mine. rather, the insistence on participation marks is the primary reason i'm not teaching right now. rather, it's to enforce discipline in scheduling. i didn't fully get that at the time, but i do now. and in the sense that i'm a bad worker/slave, i suppose i got the marks i deserved.
why didn't i want to participate? because the students were terrible elitists. i didn't have fancy clothes or expensive shoes, and didn't really care to drop out for a year to save up to buy them. worse, they were culturally dead. i never thought for a minute, growing up, that i'd walk into a university classroom and learn that the most pressing topic of discussion amongst the students in the room was the tv show 'friends'. so, we're talking about people that follow cultural norms and are slaves to fashion trends. free thinkers? far from it. i remember trying to start a discussion about rachmaninov with somebody that identified themselves as liking music and just getting stared right through, as though i was talking some other language. this person wanted to talk about some awful, boring "indie rock" music and was just confused by my absolute disinterest. it was incredibly disillusioning. i simply didn't have anything in common with anybody to the point where i found it difficult to even be in the same room with them.
so, i didn't go to class, and i don't regret that. what i regret is maintaining the delusion that i had a future in the school system. i wish i would have given up sooner and not wasted so much time with it.
this was part of the reason i switched into math. i thought if there was anywhere to avoid pop culture, that would be it. but it wasn't any better. about the only person i was able to get along with was a mildly autistic kid from russia that could barely speak english. he just didn't know anything about american culture. i found that refreshing.
i can't honestly think the hippies would have been much better, despite what noam is saying. so, is there any hope of building democratic institutions, with the culture the way it is? i don't see it...
the second problem was profs that would give you bullshit grades for not showing up. we like to think of the system as relatively objective, but that kind of garbage is still fairly common. i'd say i lost close to a full grade point to participation marks, and more than that from profs entering in fraudulent marks. but i didn't start challenging (and winning) those kinds of cases for far too long....
the second was that the issue cycles itself around. depression from not fitting in or being able to relate works it's way into other aspects of your life. not going to class to avoid the social part of it becomes not caring enough to bother doing homework. then, there's the profs that teach things that aren't in the text in order to catch the students that don't show up, out of some kind of sadistic pleasure.
what i would have wanted, myself, would be to take the professor right out of the situation. no gods, no masters. i'd rather see standardized curricula that are basically just course notes. the way i'd conceive of the process working is that the notes and assignments are handed out to the students at the beginning of the semester and it's the students' responsibility to do it on their own, and then be tested at the end. no need for classes. *no need to pay the prof*. some people do like the socialization for whatever reason; an internet forum combined with voluntary discussion groups could give them what they want without excluding those that despise that sort of thing for whatever reason they despise it.
that's actually an anarchist perspective, rather than a syndicalist one.
another thing i found was that the average teaching assistant is quite literally an absolute moron. something that bugged the hell out of me was when they'd "correct" various grammatical "errors", which were almost always entirely arbitrary because they didn't like your argument and were looking for an excuse to mark it down. you'd get all kinds of grade biases. that was more when i was studying law. when i was studying math, and later comp sci, the tas were often unable to follow any argument that wasn't in the solution sheet. i'd continually have to take it to the prof to get it marked right...
the conclusion i've come to is that the schools are being forced to hire unqualified students because there are too many positions. but the diploma mill nature of most modern universities ensures there's a surplus of labour.
it's a catastrophe, really.
there was actually one comp sci course where the ta's solution sheet was so bad that i felt the need to rewrite it and post the corrections on my website. worse, the ta taught the course. and it was, like, $1200...for that sum, we couldn't even get a valid solution sheet or a prof that knew what he was talking about...
(link apparently lost)
i'm also far more of an individualist than the average leftist. i find anarchism is often an intellectual position that syndicalist style socialists take, out of various historical reasons. people that actually feel and live and breathe anarchism are far rarer.
i'd rather do away with professors altogether by expelling them purely to research. i don't know where this idea that research and teaching ought to be connected comes from, but i think it really ought to be separated. why do we have our brightest minds teaching simple ideas to teenagers? why not just literally give them lobotomies and lock them up in cages?
the problems i had going through school were primarily related to my inability to work well in groups, and my anxiety in social situations. about the only worthwhile thing i learned in high school was that i understand things better reading them out of a book by myself in my bedroom than i do by wasting my time sitting in a classroom. i was told that i would be better suited for the university system because of that greater emphasis on independent learning and critical thought. what i found was the exact opposite, for a few reasons.
the first was profs that would grade you based on attendance. there's two levels to this. the first are the ones that actually make it a part of the grading scheme. so, you get 10 or 15% for just showing up. i'd argue that's preposterous on it's face. but what i found was that i couldn't show up for various reasons that the school wouldn't recognize as valid, and if i did i'd start yelling at people. so, i'd instantly forfeit a tenth or more of the grade. sometimes, i could ace the rest of the course material and get a decent mark. other times, an A became a B or a C because of it, or a B became as low as a D.
and they say it's to inflate the grade? it didn't inflate mine. rather, the insistence on participation marks is the primary reason i'm not teaching right now. rather, it's to enforce discipline in scheduling. i didn't fully get that at the time, but i do now. and in the sense that i'm a bad worker/slave, i suppose i got the marks i deserved.
why didn't i want to participate? because the students were terrible elitists. i didn't have fancy clothes or expensive shoes, and didn't really care to drop out for a year to save up to buy them. worse, they were culturally dead. i never thought for a minute, growing up, that i'd walk into a university classroom and learn that the most pressing topic of discussion amongst the students in the room was the tv show 'friends'. so, we're talking about people that follow cultural norms and are slaves to fashion trends. free thinkers? far from it. i remember trying to start a discussion about rachmaninov with somebody that identified themselves as liking music and just getting stared right through, as though i was talking some other language. this person wanted to talk about some awful, boring "indie rock" music and was just confused by my absolute disinterest. it was incredibly disillusioning. i simply didn't have anything in common with anybody to the point where i found it difficult to even be in the same room with them.
so, i didn't go to class, and i don't regret that. what i regret is maintaining the delusion that i had a future in the school system. i wish i would have given up sooner and not wasted so much time with it.
this was part of the reason i switched into math. i thought if there was anywhere to avoid pop culture, that would be it. but it wasn't any better. about the only person i was able to get along with was a mildly autistic kid from russia that could barely speak english. he just didn't know anything about american culture. i found that refreshing.
i can't honestly think the hippies would have been much better, despite what noam is saying. so, is there any hope of building democratic institutions, with the culture the way it is? i don't see it...
the second problem was profs that would give you bullshit grades for not showing up. we like to think of the system as relatively objective, but that kind of garbage is still fairly common. i'd say i lost close to a full grade point to participation marks, and more than that from profs entering in fraudulent marks. but i didn't start challenging (and winning) those kinds of cases for far too long....
the second was that the issue cycles itself around. depression from not fitting in or being able to relate works it's way into other aspects of your life. not going to class to avoid the social part of it becomes not caring enough to bother doing homework. then, there's the profs that teach things that aren't in the text in order to catch the students that don't show up, out of some kind of sadistic pleasure.
what i would have wanted, myself, would be to take the professor right out of the situation. no gods, no masters. i'd rather see standardized curricula that are basically just course notes. the way i'd conceive of the process working is that the notes and assignments are handed out to the students at the beginning of the semester and it's the students' responsibility to do it on their own, and then be tested at the end. no need for classes. *no need to pay the prof*. some people do like the socialization for whatever reason; an internet forum combined with voluntary discussion groups could give them what they want without excluding those that despise that sort of thing for whatever reason they despise it.
that's actually an anarchist perspective, rather than a syndicalist one.
another thing i found was that the average teaching assistant is quite literally an absolute moron. something that bugged the hell out of me was when they'd "correct" various grammatical "errors", which were almost always entirely arbitrary because they didn't like your argument and were looking for an excuse to mark it down. you'd get all kinds of grade biases. that was more when i was studying law. when i was studying math, and later comp sci, the tas were often unable to follow any argument that wasn't in the solution sheet. i'd continually have to take it to the prof to get it marked right...
the conclusion i've come to is that the schools are being forced to hire unqualified students because there are too many positions. but the diploma mill nature of most modern universities ensures there's a surplus of labour.
it's a catastrophe, really.
there was actually one comp sci course where the ta's solution sheet was so bad that i felt the need to rewrite it and post the corrections on my website. worse, the ta taught the course. and it was, like, $1200...for that sum, we couldn't even get a valid solution sheet or a prof that knew what he was talking about...
(link apparently lost)
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)