they're doing their best to come up with rational explanations, but i think they need to take a step back and determine if some of these "comet tails" might be something else entirely.
they may have caught something intelligent.
http://www.nature.com/news/hubble-space-telescope-spots-unprecedented-asteroid-with-six-tails-1.14133
"what's happened is that a weather balloon has gotten lost in the asteroid belt, and caused an exotic refraction event where one tail appears as six"
no, honestly. i think the probability of historical extra-terrestrial contact is many times higher than the probability of god. so, before you write the idea off as nuts, carefully ask yourself which is more likely.
in fact, i'm not the first person to point out that the bible actually makes perfect sense if you interpret the judaic religions as ufo cults. all those seemingly whacked stories about beings in the clouds are brought out of the level of fantasy into the level of allegory.
that's nothing approaching empirical evidence, mind you. but it's an interesting way to interpret religion. and i have to admit believing that there's something to the idea.
the biggest problem from a physics perspective, i think, is simply that it's hard for humans to understand space travel relative to our relatively short lifespans. yet, if we could live for five or six thousand years, that limitation would dissolve. a distance of 100 light years would be nothing.
i don't see any good reason to think that a hypothetical alien species couldn't live that long.
it does put a limit on ourselves, though. things like tachyon space ships are probably impossible. there's probably not warps in space time to take advantage of. if there are creatures floating around through space, it's more likely that they're very long lived than that they've found some ingenious way to "break physics". and that means we're probably more or less out of luck.
well, i guess we could freeze ourselves or something, but that's still a gigantic limitation.
imagine, though. like, 10,000 years is more than the length of human civilization up to now. the entire rise and fall of human civilization could be something that an intelligent extra-terrestrial creature could experience in one life time.
"wow. the last time i was here, you creatures were obsessed with building pyramids. what happened to the nose on that one?"
trees can live for thousands of years. whales and turtles live for hundreds. it's not out of the realm of plausibility.
i mean, how long did dinosaurs live for?
(answer: can't really tell from bones.)
no david icke, please.
jellyfish are thought to be potentially immortal.
but, yeah. wouldn't the asteroid belt be a natural place to find mining craft?
jeff
As with the lobster, they grow until eaten. As for the Bible it is highly possible to be speaking of aliens although no evidence, it is still a believe in my books. As far as space travel, age is slowed and with understanding of physics and anti gravity etc there life span could be highly lengthened to travel the distances required. Not to mention the idea of worm holes or Muti~ dimension travel. I could go on but hate typing so..
jessica amber murray
lobsters will keep growing until they die, but they aren't actually immortal. they will die of old age. with jellyfish, they could in theory just never die - although they do, of course, die due to various other reasons.
what i'm talking about specifically are a number of stories in the bible where alien contact could be presented as a rational/scientific explanation to something that otherwise seems like utter fiction, like the story about a chariot of fire coming down from the sky to take elijah to heaven, for example. there's a ton of stories like that in the bible, and as many (if not more) in east indian, native american, egyptian and other religious sources that seem to quite literally be describing extra-terrestrial contact. the standard rationalist/skeptic approach to these stories is currently to just write them off as nonsense. i'm not entirely comfortable with that level of dismissal. the stories must mean something. salvaging them as weakly remembered contact encounters is one way to give them a rational meaning.
if you take the idea as a possibility, it's easy to construct a narrative of these primitive ape-like creatures (us) running around through the forest collecting berries and coming into contact with these incredible spaceships. got the mental image? good. the next step is interaction with these far more advanced beings, and the inevitability of humans interpreting them as gods. there's even a historical comparison: a number of native american tribes (not all) interpreted the spanish as gods because they had far more advanced weapons and far more advanced ships. it's hard to think how hunter-gathering humans would interpret galaxy-jumping aliens, except as gods. and, so, religion is born from a naturalistic and rather biological explanation.
what it is is a hypothesis, and all hypotheses require some sort of faith in their incubation stages. by definition, really. science doesn't reject faith, so much as it demands that faith be erected upon evidence and subject to modification as the evidence changes. not "i believe, because.", but "i believe because...".
i think what you're trying to say about time-dilation is that close to light speed travel would necessarily require that a much longer period of time transpires on their home planet, but, as mentioned, that's an issue that would decrease in meaningfulness if the hypothetical aliens have very long lifespans. from the perspective of somebody in the spaceship, time outside their frame of reference would actually be dramatically sped up. the point i was trying to make is that if there are aliens zooming around then they would have to be creatures that live very long lives.
worm holes and hyper-dimensional travel likely exist only in the world of science fiction. alas...
jeff
Agreed, Indian culture is by far the most understanding when talking about alien culture even Indian (Hindu) kids understand the possibility to the point where it's a normal event. I wish I had more patient to type all I want to say but... Again the Bible I my mind is clearly a lack of understanding of what they are witnessing and trying to describe. The reason the Bible stands out is before writings everything was by word of mouth, when writing came about the most important of things and issues where scripted. If these things were true or just for sake of the church is another story all together. As far as hyper~dimensional travel not existing may be cause it can't or we don't understand it/how. Example.. Earth is flat till we found out it wasn't. Bad example maybe?. Going back to how long aliens life spans are to achieve long distances, I would like to think that they require the same fundamental things as us(food source and water). The fact that the greys etc.. Have same features( eyes,mouth,nose) leads me to conclude that there organs are similar as we'll(maybe no appendix etc). Which makes them of the same evolution timetable. If from same timetable but clearly more advanced then that species is in the same galaxy or closer. And clearly more older of a species(duh)lol. I wonder why you never see baby aliens is it because by the time they travel to there destination they have aged? Just kidding lol! What I'm saying is that species is clearly and older species but the life span can't be longer than 150 because of the same make of looks(nose,mouth,eyes) which means that the organs can only function so long or their tech. has allowed for a longer life span. None of what I wrote is backed by fact so take it with grain of salt. Just alot of wasted time on documentaries etc.
jessica amber murray
ah, but tortoises have similar features and yet are thought to have maximum lifespans approaching 300 years. whales can live at least more than 200 years - and they're even mammals! conversely, frogs and pigs and dogs and cats have similar features and much lower lifespans. i'm not convinced that what would be convergent evolution to similar phenotypic expression has much to say regarding average lifespan.
the popular representation of aliens is based on a combination of leprechaun folklore and a description by science fiction writer hg wells. it's not really something i'm taking overly seriously. i'm not even convinced that they're carbon based, really.
i will say, though, that aliens are often presented as short and wrinkled, which does suggest an advanced age. take et, for example.
in order for hyper-dimensional travel to exist, we first must demonstrate that we exist in a universe with more than 3 spatial dimensions. a wormhole is essentially travel through the 4th dimension. it's an exotic idea that exists in some mathematical models, but is not necessitated by them; we can mathematically show that wormholes *might* be possible, but we have no reason (at this point) to think that they *ought* to exist. black holes definitely exist, but we don't know what happens when we go through them (and think it's unlikely that anybody gets spat out alive on the other side). the flat earth metaphor is consequently indeed a sort of bad one. the better extrapolation of the spherical earth to the universe lies in analyzing it's shape. the universe might be shaped sort of like a donut. it might be possible to set off in one direction and end up back at the earth again. we don't really know yet, though. the quality being discussed there is curvature: curvature of the earth, of the universe. with dimensions, the more standard analogy to use is an ant. pretend ants can't climb up walls, that they can only move on the ground. they'd only understand two-dimensions. no understanding of the up/down axis. as far as they know, it doesn't exist. yet, it does. is there a fourth spacial dimension that we likewise have no understanding of? if there is, are we any more able to understand it than an ant is able to understand up/down? the standard, mainstream position in physics right now is that there is no evidence of extra spacial dimensions, and that building evidence is probably impossible. also, the way that extra dimensions are used in certain extensions to quantum mechanics (such as string theory, also a mathematical contrivance with zero experimental reasoning) is not at all the same thing, conceptually. bluntly: hyper-dimensional travel is unlikely because extra spacial dimensions are unlikely.
surreal fact: a lot of the old testament is newer than the new testament. and the oral sources were not exclusively from the middle east. the iranian religion of zoroastrianism seems to have been a dominant influence. regardless, those ideas have their own histories, and i do think there's something to this idea.
Tuesday, November 12, 2013
ok, so, as everybody that pays attention to these things knows always happens in the end, the state has threatened the use of violence if it's dictates are not obeyed (it's dictates in this case being property rights laws, regardless of debates over who actually owns the land).
as everybody knows that the state will use violence to enforce itself, why are there still people behaving as though this is shocking or unexpected?
these sorts of tactics fail. every time. yet, they continue.
i get that it's partly out of desperation. the legalities around claiming the land are complex, and a court is not likely to award the first nation control over the land. it's in new brunswick, which is under a peace/friendship treaty relationship that basically denies that the first nations ever owned anything outside of their settlements in the first place. regardless, the proclamation was crystal clear on this point: the crown owns these lands and can do as the crown pleases. this is canadian law on the subject. this is why there are cops out there enforcing the crown's property rights.
the possibility of a modern treaty exists in this area, but there is bound to be extreme disagreement over which areas fall under such an agreement and this area - which neither appears to have been in use before or after contact - is not likely to pass that test.
yet, if the law is useless, and everybody realizes it, then they have to take it to the next level. peaceful protest never got anybody anything except a jail sentence.
if what they want is to declare their disagreement for the sake of the public record, well, that's what they're doing. if what they want to do is actually stop it....
http://warriorpublications.wordpress.com/2013/11/12/heavy-rcmp-presence-accompanies-swns-return/
as an aside, i doubt it's a coincidence that eastern canada just got it's first cold snap.
that's the level of respect the cops give these guys: they'll go away when it gets cold.
as everybody knows that the state will use violence to enforce itself, why are there still people behaving as though this is shocking or unexpected?
these sorts of tactics fail. every time. yet, they continue.
i get that it's partly out of desperation. the legalities around claiming the land are complex, and a court is not likely to award the first nation control over the land. it's in new brunswick, which is under a peace/friendship treaty relationship that basically denies that the first nations ever owned anything outside of their settlements in the first place. regardless, the proclamation was crystal clear on this point: the crown owns these lands and can do as the crown pleases. this is canadian law on the subject. this is why there are cops out there enforcing the crown's property rights.
the possibility of a modern treaty exists in this area, but there is bound to be extreme disagreement over which areas fall under such an agreement and this area - which neither appears to have been in use before or after contact - is not likely to pass that test.
yet, if the law is useless, and everybody realizes it, then they have to take it to the next level. peaceful protest never got anybody anything except a jail sentence.
if what they want is to declare their disagreement for the sake of the public record, well, that's what they're doing. if what they want to do is actually stop it....
http://warriorpublications.wordpress.com/2013/11/12/heavy-rcmp-presence-accompanies-swns-return/
as an aside, i doubt it's a coincidence that eastern canada just got it's first cold snap.
that's the level of respect the cops give these guys: they'll go away when it gets cold.
so, somebody hook me up to chomsky. then pynchon. quick. time is of the essence.
or: sure beats spending ten years to get a phd.
or: innnnnnnnnnnnppppuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuut!! need innnnnnnnppuuuuuuuuut!
anarchists often reject the concept of specialization.
...and then get laughed at.
it's something i try to distance myself from.
but, this makes the idea more palatable.
http://www.washington.edu/news/2013/08/27/researcher-controls-colleagues-motions-in-1st-human-brain-to-brain-interface/
or: sure beats spending ten years to get a phd.
or: innnnnnnnnnnnppppuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuut!! need innnnnnnnppuuuuuuuuut!
anarchists often reject the concept of specialization.
...and then get laughed at.
it's something i try to distance myself from.
but, this makes the idea more palatable.
http://www.washington.edu/news/2013/08/27/researcher-controls-colleagues-motions-in-1st-human-brain-to-brain-interface/
Monday, November 11, 2013
Whoever ends up owning the three plots, the Nisga’a will always retain ultimate title to the land. Homeowners will pay Nisga’a taxes, be subject to Nisga’a laws and if they die without a will, the property reverts to Nisga’a ownership. If the house is in the way of a public works project, the Nisga’a will even have the power of expropriation.
this paragraph is absolutely true, as it relates to the nisga'a.
it's absolutely false as it relates to reserve lands that harper wants to mess around with with his private property act. as the crown has allodial title to reserve lands, converting them to private property would be catastrophic.
bit of a bait and switch, here. don't compare the two situations. not comparable.
http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/11/08/b-c-first-nation-leads-historic-and-controversial-move-toward-aboriginal-private-home-ownership/
this paragraph is absolutely true, as it relates to the nisga'a.
it's absolutely false as it relates to reserve lands that harper wants to mess around with with his private property act. as the crown has allodial title to reserve lands, converting them to private property would be catastrophic.
bit of a bait and switch, here. don't compare the two situations. not comparable.
http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/11/08/b-c-first-nation-leads-historic-and-controversial-move-toward-aboriginal-private-home-ownership/
the kid upstairs is going to go through the floor.
she's autistic. which seems to mean she doesn't have a clear understanding of herself in a spatial context. she's also a little overweight. but, the issue (regardless of weight) is not understanding how to walk without stomping.
she's not just creaking the floor. she's breaking wood planks. you can hear them snap as she stomps around. and i mean STOMP around.
see, as annoying as it's going to be for me to deal with a hole in the ceiling, i'm kind of more concerned that she's going to hurt herself and i don't really know how to bring that up. i'm going to guess that actually reversing the stomping is going to require some careful and patient coaching, that it's going to be frustrating for everybody and that it might actually be impossible to change habitually, in the long term.
i wouldn't even be thinking about this if it were just the sound. i'd just be 'whatever. let the kid stomp.'. but, it really is predictable that she's going to stomp right through a wood plank at some point. so, i kind of feel obligated to point it out.
it's just....how do you do this....
i'm not concerned about offense. no, really, i'm not. i don't care about that. it's more that if i'm going to bother taking the time to offend them, i want to make sure that they actually listen rather than just get offended and then not do anything. see, and i know that humans aren't particularly intelligent creatures - i know that they tend to irrationally react to certain things on an emotional level, ignore anything approaching a rigourous analysis and then consciously decide to *not* follow through with a logical reaction, apparently purely out of spite for reason.
i have to say something to somebody. suggestions?
mom
Bring it to the attention of your landlord...
jessica amber murray
yeah, see, the landlord is the tenant's brother, and the stomper's uncle. the brother seems to be a little challenged as well, but not as much.
it might be the best option, i agree. but i'm no closer to a tactic.
"your niece is going to stomp through the floor" is blunt. i like blunt. but i don't want to piss him off too badly, unless i'm sure he's going to listen (at which point, the piss off will necessarily be temporary - logic will prevail).
i should also point out that he owns this place, specifically, so that his mentally challenged brother and niece have an affordable place to stay. so, if i bring it up, it has to be with the sole intent of therapy.
mom
Just explain to him the way you explained it on here....
jessica amber murray
i think what i need is less an angle and more the right context. just bringing it up at the right time kind of thing.
she's autistic. which seems to mean she doesn't have a clear understanding of herself in a spatial context. she's also a little overweight. but, the issue (regardless of weight) is not understanding how to walk without stomping.
she's not just creaking the floor. she's breaking wood planks. you can hear them snap as she stomps around. and i mean STOMP around.
see, as annoying as it's going to be for me to deal with a hole in the ceiling, i'm kind of more concerned that she's going to hurt herself and i don't really know how to bring that up. i'm going to guess that actually reversing the stomping is going to require some careful and patient coaching, that it's going to be frustrating for everybody and that it might actually be impossible to change habitually, in the long term.
i wouldn't even be thinking about this if it were just the sound. i'd just be 'whatever. let the kid stomp.'. but, it really is predictable that she's going to stomp right through a wood plank at some point. so, i kind of feel obligated to point it out.
it's just....how do you do this....
i'm not concerned about offense. no, really, i'm not. i don't care about that. it's more that if i'm going to bother taking the time to offend them, i want to make sure that they actually listen rather than just get offended and then not do anything. see, and i know that humans aren't particularly intelligent creatures - i know that they tend to irrationally react to certain things on an emotional level, ignore anything approaching a rigourous analysis and then consciously decide to *not* follow through with a logical reaction, apparently purely out of spite for reason.
i have to say something to somebody. suggestions?
mom
Bring it to the attention of your landlord...
jessica amber murray
yeah, see, the landlord is the tenant's brother, and the stomper's uncle. the brother seems to be a little challenged as well, but not as much.
it might be the best option, i agree. but i'm no closer to a tactic.
"your niece is going to stomp through the floor" is blunt. i like blunt. but i don't want to piss him off too badly, unless i'm sure he's going to listen (at which point, the piss off will necessarily be temporary - logic will prevail).
i should also point out that he owns this place, specifically, so that his mentally challenged brother and niece have an affordable place to stay. so, if i bring it up, it has to be with the sole intent of therapy.
mom
Just explain to him the way you explained it on here....
jessica amber murray
i think what i need is less an angle and more the right context. just bringing it up at the right time kind of thing.
Some Egyptian journalists made little effort to conceal their bias during the session. They joined in anti-Brotherhood chants with the plaintiffs' lawyers, who held up photos of one of the men killed during the December clashes, journalist Hussein Abu Deif. During the nine-minute recess, one journalist even scrambled on top of the wooden pews and attempted to launch a shoe at Morsy's defense team, which had accused Egyptian media of being bought by the United States. He was soon wrestled to the ground by security forces.
this isn't about farming, it's about attacking the local poor. if these capitalist assholes want to actually help (they don't), what they should do is fuck off and let people redevelop the land independently.
http://io9.com/people-are-building-enormous-farms-in-the-ruins-of-detr-1457044514
http://io9.com/people-are-building-enormous-farms-in-the-ruins-of-detr-1457044514
i think the soldiers that exist on the supply side make any demands for lower prices a type of consumer-driven fascism that is entirely inconsistent with any kind of socialism.
this was entirely predictable, even years ago. the hierarchy that chavez left behind was absolutely dependent on his altruism. any kind of even marginally less enlightened fool - and that would be a compliment if directed at maduro - would inevitably interpret taking control of that system as inheriting a fascist dictatorship.
we'll find out how much of a socialist veneer he wants to hang on to, and we'll find out just how ideological the venezuelan masses really are. but i'm fully expecting this to end up more like franco's spain than castro's cuba.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2013/11/09/venezuela-seizes-stores/3486581/
this was entirely predictable, even years ago. the hierarchy that chavez left behind was absolutely dependent on his altruism. any kind of even marginally less enlightened fool - and that would be a compliment if directed at maduro - would inevitably interpret taking control of that system as inheriting a fascist dictatorship.
we'll find out how much of a socialist veneer he wants to hang on to, and we'll find out just how ideological the venezuelan masses really are. but i'm fully expecting this to end up more like franco's spain than castro's cuba.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2013/11/09/venezuela-seizes-stores/3486581/
so, as was predictable, what's happened in syria is that the saudis have taken over the military command (they were already the dominant planners), and the israelis are providing (limited) air support instead of the americans. classic proxy war.
the israelis don't generally take the time to care about what the un does or does not think.
the israelis don't generally take the time to care about what the un does or does not think.
http://english.alarabiya.net/en/sports/2013/11/08/Ousted-President-Mubarak-says-Egypt-can-bounce-back-against-Ghana.html
http://physics.aps.org/synopsis-for/10.1103/PhysRevLett.111.181302
http://phys.org/news/2013-11-explore-natural-solution-household-plumbing.html
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=what-is-4-d-printing-manufacturing&WT.mc_id=SA_Facebook
http://phy.so/302782222
http://phy.so/302789393
http://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2013/nov/05/india-rocket-mars-isro-video
this is basically stating that some types of solar panels can convert sound waves into electricity. of course, it's always going to be a net loss. but the idea that noise pollution (ambient sounds that are created as a byproduct of something else) could possibly be used to generate electricity is an interesting one. that's energy that is being lost from some other process...
http://phy.so/302942703
http://www.nature.com/news/neuroelectronics-smart-connections-1.14089
http://www.washington.edu/news/2013/11/06/a-shot-in-the-dark-detector-at-uw-on-the-hunt-for-dark-matter/
http://phy.so/303045944
http://phy.so/303036284
http://phys.org/news/2013-11-artificial-heart-human-future-robots.html
http://phy.so/303101283
http://www.astrobio.net/exclusive/5785/moonlight-and-mortality
http://www.nature.com/news/fountain-of-youth-gene-unleashes-healing-power-1.14128?WT.mc_id=FBK_NPG_1311_NatureNews
http://www.symmetrymagazine.org/article/november-2013/ultra-high-energy-neutrinos
http://www.nature.com/news/hubble-space-telescope-spots-unprecedented-comet-with-six-tails-1.14133
http://www.nature.com/news/specials/neuroscience2013/index.html
http://physics.aps.org/articles/v6/122
http://arxiv.org/abs/1310.7494
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/morsi-trial-if-a-court-can-exemplify-the-divisions-of-a-nation-this-one-did-for-egypt-8921397.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L7-G9VrJr_k
http://physics.aps.org/synopsis-for/10.1103/PhysRevLett.111.181302
http://phys.org/news/2013-11-explore-natural-solution-household-plumbing.html
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=what-is-4-d-printing-manufacturing&WT.mc_id=SA_Facebook
http://phy.so/302782222
http://phy.so/302789393
http://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2013/nov/05/india-rocket-mars-isro-video
this is basically stating that some types of solar panels can convert sound waves into electricity. of course, it's always going to be a net loss. but the idea that noise pollution (ambient sounds that are created as a byproduct of something else) could possibly be used to generate electricity is an interesting one. that's energy that is being lost from some other process...
http://phy.so/302942703
http://www.nature.com/news/neuroelectronics-smart-connections-1.14089
http://www.washington.edu/news/2013/11/06/a-shot-in-the-dark-detector-at-uw-on-the-hunt-for-dark-matter/
http://phy.so/303045944
http://phy.so/303036284
http://phys.org/news/2013-11-artificial-heart-human-future-robots.html
http://phy.so/303101283
http://www.astrobio.net/exclusive/5785/moonlight-and-mortality
http://www.nature.com/news/fountain-of-youth-gene-unleashes-healing-power-1.14128?WT.mc_id=FBK_NPG_1311_NatureNews
http://www.symmetrymagazine.org/article/november-2013/ultra-high-energy-neutrinos
http://www.nature.com/news/hubble-space-telescope-spots-unprecedented-comet-with-six-tails-1.14133
http://www.nature.com/news/specials/neuroscience2013/index.html
http://physics.aps.org/articles/v6/122
http://arxiv.org/abs/1310.7494
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/morsi-trial-if-a-court-can-exemplify-the-divisions-of-a-nation-this-one-did-for-egypt-8921397.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L7-G9VrJr_k
i have some ideological problems with modelling....
to clarify: the article bounces between 'surface temperatures have slowed their rate of increase' and 'global warming has paused' type statements. the former is true: surface warming is still happening, and the warming is still increasing, but the *rate* is not increasing. it's a linear increase, rather than an exponential one.
that doesn't question the idea, and the magazine deserves a talking to for trying to capture the skeptic market, really. it just questions the perfection of the models.
but the perfection of the models was never in doubt. we all know better than to trust the weather forecast, right?
it's a non-issue, except to point out that the models are constantly being improved.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=has-global-warming-paused
to clarify: the article bounces between 'surface temperatures have slowed their rate of increase' and 'global warming has paused' type statements. the former is true: surface warming is still happening, and the warming is still increasing, but the *rate* is not increasing. it's a linear increase, rather than an exponential one.
that doesn't question the idea, and the magazine deserves a talking to for trying to capture the skeptic market, really. it just questions the perfection of the models.
but the perfection of the models was never in doubt. we all know better than to trust the weather forecast, right?
it's a non-issue, except to point out that the models are constantly being improved.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=has-global-warming-paused
Economist Jean-Paul Fitoussi told the daily Libération: “Europe is plunging into an endless spiral, with explosive levels of unemployment in Greece, Spain, and even Italy. Can democracy survive when 60 percent of youth have no job? The probability of a social explosion is increasing each month.”
see, *that* is a group of people that, unlike unionized wage slaves focused on feeding their kids, actually has some legitimate revolutionary potential.
wish i was there...
hopefully, that kind of unemployment rate is on it's way here to southern ontario, though.
see, *that* is a group of people that, unlike unionized wage slaves focused on feeding their kids, actually has some legitimate revolutionary potential.
wish i was there...
hopefully, that kind of unemployment rate is on it's way here to southern ontario, though.
Sunday, November 10, 2013
useless (valium mix)
this is the original version slowed down to half speed, which i actually briefly considered releasing as the final version as i felt it was aesthetically appropriate.
recorded in jan, 1998.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/useless-valium
recorded in jan, 1998.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/useless-valium
i was actually wondering, on a whim, if being a habitual smoker could lower the risk of tapeworm and other parasitic infection. still wondering; it doesn't appear as though anybody's studied this. know a kid studying biology? there's an iconoclastic research topic for them...
this is neat though, and contributes to the "you didn't think all these life forms around us were going to just give up and quit evolving, did you?" anti-anthropocentric view i periodically post on.
http://www.personal.psu.edu/afr3/blogs/siowfa12/2012/12/one-of-the-few-benefits-of-smoking.html
to clarify: i was wondering if it might be a natural explanation for tobacco use. well, lots of animals do lots of things to get rid of parasites. maybe humans smoked tobacco for that reason. entirely rational.
yeah, i think i might be on to something. not nicotine, but ayahuasca:
"Its purgative properties are important (known as la purga or "the purge"). The intense vomiting and occasional diarrhea it induces can clear the body of worms and other tropical parasites,[28] and harmala alkaloids themselves have been shown to be anthelmintic[29] Thus, this action is twofold; a direct action on the parasites by these harmala alkaloids (particularly harmine in ayahuasca) works to kill the parasites, and parasites are expelled through the increased intestinal motility that is caused by these alkaloids."
this is neat though, and contributes to the "you didn't think all these life forms around us were going to just give up and quit evolving, did you?" anti-anthropocentric view i periodically post on.
http://www.personal.psu.edu/afr3/blogs/siowfa12/2012/12/one-of-the-few-benefits-of-smoking.html
to clarify: i was wondering if it might be a natural explanation for tobacco use. well, lots of animals do lots of things to get rid of parasites. maybe humans smoked tobacco for that reason. entirely rational.
yeah, i think i might be on to something. not nicotine, but ayahuasca:
"Its purgative properties are important (known as la purga or "the purge"). The intense vomiting and occasional diarrhea it induces can clear the body of worms and other tropical parasites,[28] and harmala alkaloids themselves have been shown to be anthelmintic[29] Thus, this action is twofold; a direct action on the parasites by these harmala alkaloids (particularly harmine in ayahuasca) works to kill the parasites, and parasites are expelled through the increased intestinal motility that is caused by these alkaloids."
they're systemically reducing the supply. it's evil.....
http://truth-out.org/news/item/19725-laura-gottesdiener-on-housing-and-fighting-back-against-dreams-delayed
http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/19770-can-unarmed-peacekeeping-work-in-syria-it-has-in-south-sudan
this narrative is built on a comparison of the nsa leaks to the forces that disintegrated the soviet union, drawing an unstated comparison to afghanistan. it's not the best comparison. by it's nature as a centralized system, communism required the mass of people to at least go along with it. capitalism, on the other hand, relies on apathy to maintain itself.
http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/19614-governing-in-the-dark
http://truth-out.org/news/item/19779-one-million-k-12-students-are-homeless
http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/19759-wikileaks-mediastan-the-true-fifth-estate-bringing-the-first-amendment-to-the-world
http://www.cnas.org/jacob-stokes-discusses-maliki-visit
ugh. and no. canada doesn't have an organized left.
http://rabble.ca/news/2013/11/bye-bye-ford-and-harper-would-their-departure-have-any-benefit-canadas-left
i think the bigger question is whether the middle east has awoken to the americans' byzantine strategy in the area. between turkey looking towards china, israel going insular, egypt being disciplined and the saudis flipping out, one has to wonder if the long term effects of obama's reaching out to iran isn't the collapse of american influence in the region.
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/11/01/the_us_saudi_royal_rumble
see, i think if you look at the greater context, the larger fear is that iran is falling under chinese hegemony - and if that happens with any level of seriousness then the entire containment/sanctions/regime-change strategy is dead.
http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/11/04/the-dna-of-iranians-and-under-secretary-sherman/
hrmmmn. my predictions about the rest of the world rejecting us banks as a result of the iranian oil embargo have so far not been realized. yet, it's maybe too soon to retract.
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/11/01/is_china_about_to_crack_down_on_jp_morgan_too
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bevis-longstreth/the-financial-case-for-di_b_4203910.html
http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/jesse/2013/11/austerity-and-politics-ford-scandal
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/11/01/is_libya_beyond_repair
http://www.democracynow.org/blog/2013/11/4/tuesday_director_oliver_stone_on_the
http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/council-canadians/2013/11/canada-quietly-ratifies-controversial-international-investm
http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/11/04/killing-peace-2/
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2013/11/04/kerr-n04.html
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2013/11/04/syri-n04.html
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2013/11/05/egyp-n05.html
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/11/clemency-for-torturers-but-not-for-edward-snowden/281142/
this is nazi shit.
http://www.truth-out.org/buzzflash/commentary/item/18292-post-9-11-cia-and-pentagon-forced-doctors-to-become-torturers-study-charges
the australians are pushing back, though.
http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2013/11/05/pers-n05.html
http://www.democracynow.org/2013/11/5/oliver_stone_on_50th_anniversary_of
http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/19825-noam-chomsky-de-americanizing-the-world
http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/11/05/a-short-history-of-populism-in-america/
at the very least, it suggests that turkey is interested in maintaining it's independence from nato. and perhaps the collapse of a russian threat gives it a little more confidence.
http://www.cnas.org/richard-weitz-discusses-motivation-for-turkish-missile-purchase
wow. what a bunch of government propaganda...
http://aptn.ca/pages/news/2013/11/04/feeling-heat-ring-fire/
http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/comfront/2013/11/honduras-trade-and-investment-expense-human-rights#.UnlClfkSK_I.twitter
well, they have to adjust, as the emperors are fiddling.
http://jacobinmag.com/2013/11/socialism-in-one-village/
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/11/04/this_is_not_a_court_this_is_a_coup_chaos_mohamed_morsy_trial
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/collideascape/2013/04/26/when-media-uncritically-cover-pseudoscience/#.UnlZKb8W1RQ
http://truth-out.org/news/item/19841-a-field-guide-to-losing-friends-influencing-no-one-and-alienating-the-middle-east
http://killerapps.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2013/11/05/cia_pentagon_drone_war_control
http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/kgrandia/2013/11/christy-clark-and-allison-redford-choose-short-term-politics-over-fu
why doesn't anybody realize that iran is in the process of joining the sco?
http://fpif.org/strange-bedfellows-israel-arabs-united-opposition-iran/
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/11/08/turkey-china-defence-idUSL5N0IT1XY20131108
http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2013-09-13/news/42041650_1_shanghai-cooperation-organisation-india-today-khurshid
http://www.cnas.org/daniel-lakin-escaping-false-choices-in-the-middle-east
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2013/11/06/exem-n06.html
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/11/the-workforce-is-even-more-divided-by-race-than-you-think/281175/
i dunno. maybe obama can find the answer by repeating more reagan quotes.
http://atfp.co/1bcsqcE
http://fpif.org/u-s-official-propagates-myths-iran-nuclear-energy/
http://truth-out.org/buzzflash/commentary/item/18298-median-wage-falls-to-lowest-level-since-2008-as-incomes-at-the-top-soar
great news. it's only through high unemployment that people will ever come together to start doing some real work for themselves and for society.
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2013/11/07/euro-n07.html
i highly doubt that the market has learned much from the dot com boom. i say buy in bulk - and sell quickly.
http://theatln.tc/16Jzsar
http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/19842-obama-must-be-called-out-not-coddled-on-keystone-xl-bait-and-switch
http://www.mediacoop.ca/video/montr%C3%A9al-26-octobre-2013-%E2%80%93-chomskymtl-askchomsky-e/19617
http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/11/07/obamas-inversion-of-organizational-mission/
http://business.financialpost.com/2013/11/07/uranium-investors-eye-nafta-challenge-in-quebec/
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2013/11/08/justin_trudeau_tom_mulcair_battle_for_downtown_toronto_tim_harper.html
http://www.socialist.ca/node/1976
http://atfp.co/1bg2KvB
the thing is that the government lacked legitimacy because the elections were boycotted by everybody except the islamists in the first place. (and don't forget that morsi's crime was leaning towards co-operation with iran.)
http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/11/08/putting-egypts-coup-on-trial/
http://libcom.org/blog/police-evict-journalists-tv-studio-following-5-month-occupation-08112013
i've often made a show of zooming by gridlocked cars, yelling and screaming, making hand signals - demonstrating how much faster i'm moving than they are.
http://www.theatlanticcities.com/commute/2013/11/simplest-way-get-people-biking/7516/
http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=10986
http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/19895-bam-bam-bam-the-lostness-of-man
http://libcom.org/history/why-blackadder-goes-forth%E2%80%99-could-have-been-lot-funnier
this is very hard to take at face value.
http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2013/11/10/how-france-scuttled-the-iran-deal-last-minute
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/11/08/the_nuclear_handshake_saudi_arabia_pakistan
http://truth-out.org/news/item/19725-laura-gottesdiener-on-housing-and-fighting-back-against-dreams-delayed
http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/19770-can-unarmed-peacekeeping-work-in-syria-it-has-in-south-sudan
this narrative is built on a comparison of the nsa leaks to the forces that disintegrated the soviet union, drawing an unstated comparison to afghanistan. it's not the best comparison. by it's nature as a centralized system, communism required the mass of people to at least go along with it. capitalism, on the other hand, relies on apathy to maintain itself.
http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/19614-governing-in-the-dark
http://truth-out.org/news/item/19779-one-million-k-12-students-are-homeless
http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/19759-wikileaks-mediastan-the-true-fifth-estate-bringing-the-first-amendment-to-the-world
http://www.cnas.org/jacob-stokes-discusses-maliki-visit
ugh. and no. canada doesn't have an organized left.
http://rabble.ca/news/2013/11/bye-bye-ford-and-harper-would-their-departure-have-any-benefit-canadas-left
i think the bigger question is whether the middle east has awoken to the americans' byzantine strategy in the area. between turkey looking towards china, israel going insular, egypt being disciplined and the saudis flipping out, one has to wonder if the long term effects of obama's reaching out to iran isn't the collapse of american influence in the region.
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/11/01/the_us_saudi_royal_rumble
see, i think if you look at the greater context, the larger fear is that iran is falling under chinese hegemony - and if that happens with any level of seriousness then the entire containment/sanctions/regime-change strategy is dead.
http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/11/04/the-dna-of-iranians-and-under-secretary-sherman/
hrmmmn. my predictions about the rest of the world rejecting us banks as a result of the iranian oil embargo have so far not been realized. yet, it's maybe too soon to retract.
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/11/01/is_china_about_to_crack_down_on_jp_morgan_too
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bevis-longstreth/the-financial-case-for-di_b_4203910.html
http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/jesse/2013/11/austerity-and-politics-ford-scandal
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/11/01/is_libya_beyond_repair
http://www.democracynow.org/blog/2013/11/4/tuesday_director_oliver_stone_on_the
http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/council-canadians/2013/11/canada-quietly-ratifies-controversial-international-investm
http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/11/04/killing-peace-2/
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2013/11/04/kerr-n04.html
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2013/11/04/syri-n04.html
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2013/11/05/egyp-n05.html
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/11/clemency-for-torturers-but-not-for-edward-snowden/281142/
this is nazi shit.
http://www.truth-out.org/buzzflash/commentary/item/18292-post-9-11-cia-and-pentagon-forced-doctors-to-become-torturers-study-charges
the australians are pushing back, though.
http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2013/11/05/pers-n05.html
http://www.democracynow.org/2013/11/5/oliver_stone_on_50th_anniversary_of
http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/19825-noam-chomsky-de-americanizing-the-world
http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/11/05/a-short-history-of-populism-in-america/
at the very least, it suggests that turkey is interested in maintaining it's independence from nato. and perhaps the collapse of a russian threat gives it a little more confidence.
http://www.cnas.org/richard-weitz-discusses-motivation-for-turkish-missile-purchase
wow. what a bunch of government propaganda...
http://aptn.ca/pages/news/2013/11/04/feeling-heat-ring-fire/
http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/comfront/2013/11/honduras-trade-and-investment-expense-human-rights#.UnlClfkSK_I.twitter
well, they have to adjust, as the emperors are fiddling.
http://jacobinmag.com/2013/11/socialism-in-one-village/
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/11/04/this_is_not_a_court_this_is_a_coup_chaos_mohamed_morsy_trial
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/collideascape/2013/04/26/when-media-uncritically-cover-pseudoscience/#.UnlZKb8W1RQ
http://truth-out.org/news/item/19841-a-field-guide-to-losing-friends-influencing-no-one-and-alienating-the-middle-east
http://killerapps.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2013/11/05/cia_pentagon_drone_war_control
http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/kgrandia/2013/11/christy-clark-and-allison-redford-choose-short-term-politics-over-fu
why doesn't anybody realize that iran is in the process of joining the sco?
http://fpif.org/strange-bedfellows-israel-arabs-united-opposition-iran/
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/11/08/turkey-china-defence-idUSL5N0IT1XY20131108
http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2013-09-13/news/42041650_1_shanghai-cooperation-organisation-india-today-khurshid
http://www.cnas.org/daniel-lakin-escaping-false-choices-in-the-middle-east
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2013/11/06/exem-n06.html
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/11/the-workforce-is-even-more-divided-by-race-than-you-think/281175/
i dunno. maybe obama can find the answer by repeating more reagan quotes.
http://atfp.co/1bcsqcE
http://fpif.org/u-s-official-propagates-myths-iran-nuclear-energy/
http://truth-out.org/buzzflash/commentary/item/18298-median-wage-falls-to-lowest-level-since-2008-as-incomes-at-the-top-soar
great news. it's only through high unemployment that people will ever come together to start doing some real work for themselves and for society.
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2013/11/07/euro-n07.html
i highly doubt that the market has learned much from the dot com boom. i say buy in bulk - and sell quickly.
http://theatln.tc/16Jzsar
http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/19842-obama-must-be-called-out-not-coddled-on-keystone-xl-bait-and-switch
http://www.mediacoop.ca/video/montr%C3%A9al-26-octobre-2013-%E2%80%93-chomskymtl-askchomsky-e/19617
http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/11/07/obamas-inversion-of-organizational-mission/
http://business.financialpost.com/2013/11/07/uranium-investors-eye-nafta-challenge-in-quebec/
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2013/11/08/justin_trudeau_tom_mulcair_battle_for_downtown_toronto_tim_harper.html
http://www.socialist.ca/node/1976
http://atfp.co/1bg2KvB
the thing is that the government lacked legitimacy because the elections were boycotted by everybody except the islamists in the first place. (and don't forget that morsi's crime was leaning towards co-operation with iran.)
http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/11/08/putting-egypts-coup-on-trial/
http://libcom.org/blog/police-evict-journalists-tv-studio-following-5-month-occupation-08112013
i've often made a show of zooming by gridlocked cars, yelling and screaming, making hand signals - demonstrating how much faster i'm moving than they are.
http://www.theatlanticcities.com/commute/2013/11/simplest-way-get-people-biking/7516/
http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=10986
http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/19895-bam-bam-bam-the-lostness-of-man
http://libcom.org/history/why-blackadder-goes-forth%E2%80%99-could-have-been-lot-funnier
this is very hard to take at face value.
http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2013/11/10/how-france-scuttled-the-iran-deal-last-minute
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/11/08/the_nuclear_handshake_saudi_arabia_pakistan
i'm not really getting his point, here. he's citing marx, but he seems to be arguing against communism.....?
the article he's rebutting is fairly clear to me: if you invest, you will get rewards. whether the investment is coming from capitalists and banks or a "worker's state" seems secondary to the obvious point, which is indeed a no brainer. the article also points out rather clearly that a substantial part of the increase in productivity is the result of mechanization. the entire thing is a horrific straw man. i'm not sure if it was purposefully ignored or not, but the point made was that mechanization requires an educated workforce, that investing in education will lead to better and better technology which will increase in productivity.
missing the point is one thing, but where this kay guy goes through the looking glass is when he seems to suggest that this is terrible because it reduces the amount of labour required. but, that's the whole premise of communism: that increases in technology will lead to super production, which will emancipate humanity and usher in a new era of "civilization".
i run across this producerist garbage a lot. half the time, i think it's union propaganda designed to confuse workers into thinking that there's no future beyond the factory. yet, that's a conspiracy theory where none is necessary. occam's razor is that the guy's never actually read any socialist theory. the internet's a great place for people to run off about things they know little about, but it would be nice if sites like libcom were more carefully about what they give space to.
as an aside, what's the suggestion? lower wages in order to prevent mechanization in order to keep more jobs? if so, that's essentially identical to the ancap argument that the minimum wage should be abolished. the article would be better off in a place like ancap.com.
http://libcom.org/blog/decent-wages-decent-capitalism-08112013
the article he's rebutting is fairly clear to me: if you invest, you will get rewards. whether the investment is coming from capitalists and banks or a "worker's state" seems secondary to the obvious point, which is indeed a no brainer. the article also points out rather clearly that a substantial part of the increase in productivity is the result of mechanization. the entire thing is a horrific straw man. i'm not sure if it was purposefully ignored or not, but the point made was that mechanization requires an educated workforce, that investing in education will lead to better and better technology which will increase in productivity.
missing the point is one thing, but where this kay guy goes through the looking glass is when he seems to suggest that this is terrible because it reduces the amount of labour required. but, that's the whole premise of communism: that increases in technology will lead to super production, which will emancipate humanity and usher in a new era of "civilization".
i run across this producerist garbage a lot. half the time, i think it's union propaganda designed to confuse workers into thinking that there's no future beyond the factory. yet, that's a conspiracy theory where none is necessary. occam's razor is that the guy's never actually read any socialist theory. the internet's a great place for people to run off about things they know little about, but it would be nice if sites like libcom were more carefully about what they give space to.
as an aside, what's the suggestion? lower wages in order to prevent mechanization in order to keep more jobs? if so, that's essentially identical to the ancap argument that the minimum wage should be abolished. the article would be better off in a place like ancap.com.
http://libcom.org/blog/decent-wages-decent-capitalism-08112013
the thing most people are missing is that his analysis isn't really leftist, it's more populist. counterpunch just ran an article on populism, but it only focused on the right-wing variety. there's definitely a historical strain of left-wing populism that brand is fitting into.
even as his "analysis" is frustrating in it's complete lack of any understanding of capitalism, i do recognize that it has a value. just speaking from personal experience, i was radicalized quite heavily by punk rock as a teenager. yet, as entertaining as jello biafra is, and as much as he was able to articulate certain things rather clearly, he was only a stepping stone towards more substantive analysis.
it's perfectly reasonable to write him off as a hack, but that doesn't mean he may not have an effect as a type of gateway. i just wish somebody could get him to name drop some people that are smarter than he is to make the path a little more explicit.
http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/11/08/russell-brand-the-posh-left-and-the-politics-of-class/
even as his "analysis" is frustrating in it's complete lack of any understanding of capitalism, i do recognize that it has a value. just speaking from personal experience, i was radicalized quite heavily by punk rock as a teenager. yet, as entertaining as jello biafra is, and as much as he was able to articulate certain things rather clearly, he was only a stepping stone towards more substantive analysis.
it's perfectly reasonable to write him off as a hack, but that doesn't mean he may not have an effect as a type of gateway. i just wish somebody could get him to name drop some people that are smarter than he is to make the path a little more explicit.
http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/11/08/russell-brand-the-posh-left-and-the-politics-of-class/
neither, it's class war. the tories know that right-to-work is unconstitutional in canada. in fact, it's even being ruled unconstitutional in the united states - a constitution with a far less comprehensive bill of rights.
this is an idea that is dead in the water. the supreme court will strike it down. they know that!
they know it doesn't create jobs, too. they know it doesn't create investment.
dalton did the same thing with teachers last year. he knows he can't take away their collective bargaining rights. yet, he did it anyways. and why?
what it's about is opening a front against workers. it's a type of vulgar marxism that takes for granted that workers are in perpetual conflict with their bosses. if workers are fighting for basic union rights, they're not fighting for better conditions and higher wages. the fact that it's unconstitutional doesn't matter - by creating the diversion, it saps organizing energy away, and puts off more substantive issues.
it also follows that if you let them get away with this they'll launch another attack. and another. and another...
...just as it follows that if they don't open up the front, if they don't try and take rights away, they'll be forced into concession after another.
so, it's not about jobs. it's about class war.
http://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark/2013/11/08/tories_say_righttowork_states_a_model_for_ontario.html
this is an idea that is dead in the water. the supreme court will strike it down. they know that!
they know it doesn't create jobs, too. they know it doesn't create investment.
dalton did the same thing with teachers last year. he knows he can't take away their collective bargaining rights. yet, he did it anyways. and why?
what it's about is opening a front against workers. it's a type of vulgar marxism that takes for granted that workers are in perpetual conflict with their bosses. if workers are fighting for basic union rights, they're not fighting for better conditions and higher wages. the fact that it's unconstitutional doesn't matter - by creating the diversion, it saps organizing energy away, and puts off more substantive issues.
it also follows that if you let them get away with this they'll launch another attack. and another. and another...
...just as it follows that if they don't open up the front, if they don't try and take rights away, they'll be forced into concession after another.
so, it's not about jobs. it's about class war.
http://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark/2013/11/08/tories_say_righttowork_states_a_model_for_ontario.html
if you eliminate corporate personhood, you eliminate all legal accountability. corporate personhood is a legal fiction that was created to allow corporations to be sued. so, corporations can now no longer be sued in these places. it's going to be interesting to see how the court reacts.
i somehow doubt that people that argue against corporate personhood understand any of this.
http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=10982
i somehow doubt that people that argue against corporate personhood understand any of this.
http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=10982
An unidentified State Department official refused to address the
Pakistani minister’s criticism, declaring coolly that the issue was “an
internal matter for Pakistan”.
i'll translate that: the pakistani minister's criticism was a political response designed to present a specific false image to pakistani voters, rather than a legitimate expression of outrage.
i saw an article a while back suggesting that there may be a connection between certain journalists and drone strikes, suggesting either that these journalists are cia or that they're being tracked.
it wouldn't surprise me to learn that the peace talks were a ploy to determine the whereabouts of certain "terrorists".
but i'm running on speculation, here.
http://truth-out.org/news/item/19905-drone-strike-served-cia-revenge-blocked-pakistans-strategy
i'll translate that: the pakistani minister's criticism was a political response designed to present a specific false image to pakistani voters, rather than a legitimate expression of outrage.
i saw an article a while back suggesting that there may be a connection between certain journalists and drone strikes, suggesting either that these journalists are cia or that they're being tracked.
it wouldn't surprise me to learn that the peace talks were a ploy to determine the whereabouts of certain "terrorists".
but i'm running on speculation, here.
http://truth-out.org/news/item/19905-drone-strike-served-cia-revenge-blocked-pakistans-strategy
this is actually good news if you're in ontario.
i'm kind of cringing at the idea of a "return to keynesianism" (which requires the broken assumption of a closed economy that is dominated by the local petty bourgeoisie and is protected by tariffs), though. we need to look forward in building new theories of economics that are built on currently existing assumptions rather than assumptions that ceased to be true some time in the 80s or 90s. from that perspective, these mathematical arguments between hayek and keynes are largely meaningless: they both assume a closed economy, so no matter how much math you run off the models are never going to accurately predict reality. i'm not aware of any kind of competing theory on the soft left that takes post-globalization as a beginning assumption and that honestly deluded liberals that still believe in capitalism could use as a moderating tool. the only ideas thinking on a global level are multinational corporatism and global communism.
but even if the multipliers don't pan out, even if the money ends up in the hands of lenders and multinationals that invest it on the other side of the world, it should create some short-term employment in construction, as well as a much needed facelift on infrastructure. maybe she got the memo on reinhart and rogoff. maybe the credit rating fascists took their boots off her neck. maybe she needs ndp support. doesn't matter...
but to get to my point: there's going to be a good chunk of cash coming down for infrastructure in the next few years. a lot of it should end up with municipalities. these municipalities are likely going to need a bit of a push to spend the cash on *sustainable* infrastructure, rather than on the carbon economy. in that sense, there's an opportunity here to actually get some input on building shit that needs to be built. yeah, i know, but maybe it's better to put off seizing collective ownership of it until it exists....
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ontarios-economic-plan-to-shift-focus-from-austerity-to-spending-and-growth/article15303331/
i'm kind of cringing at the idea of a "return to keynesianism" (which requires the broken assumption of a closed economy that is dominated by the local petty bourgeoisie and is protected by tariffs), though. we need to look forward in building new theories of economics that are built on currently existing assumptions rather than assumptions that ceased to be true some time in the 80s or 90s. from that perspective, these mathematical arguments between hayek and keynes are largely meaningless: they both assume a closed economy, so no matter how much math you run off the models are never going to accurately predict reality. i'm not aware of any kind of competing theory on the soft left that takes post-globalization as a beginning assumption and that honestly deluded liberals that still believe in capitalism could use as a moderating tool. the only ideas thinking on a global level are multinational corporatism and global communism.
but even if the multipliers don't pan out, even if the money ends up in the hands of lenders and multinationals that invest it on the other side of the world, it should create some short-term employment in construction, as well as a much needed facelift on infrastructure. maybe she got the memo on reinhart and rogoff. maybe the credit rating fascists took their boots off her neck. maybe she needs ndp support. doesn't matter...
but to get to my point: there's going to be a good chunk of cash coming down for infrastructure in the next few years. a lot of it should end up with municipalities. these municipalities are likely going to need a bit of a push to spend the cash on *sustainable* infrastructure, rather than on the carbon economy. in that sense, there's an opportunity here to actually get some input on building shit that needs to be built. yeah, i know, but maybe it's better to put off seizing collective ownership of it until it exists....
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ontarios-economic-plan-to-shift-focus-from-austerity-to-spending-and-growth/article15303331/
yeah. assad's there to stay. and he's got a hell of a mess to clean up. does he send the theocracy in saudi arabia the bill?
see, the major concern to look out for in the future is what happens ten years from now when the country is back in order and he wants pay back. as out to lunch as the saudi attack was, he can't be left there. and i hope the russians have the foresight to realize that.
http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/11/06/saudis-fight-a-losing-battle-against-change/
see, the major concern to look out for in the future is what happens ten years from now when the country is back in order and he wants pay back. as out to lunch as the saudi attack was, he can't be left there. and i hope the russians have the foresight to realize that.
http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/11/06/saudis-fight-a-losing-battle-against-change/
that list of 14 stalled agreements is comical. it's correct about the ftaa. the rest had little to do with protest movements.
i'm going to ask a difficult question.
do you think it's easier to generate opposition to trade agreements in the western hemisphere due to racism around migrant issues? if not, why is opposition so much stronger to agreements like cafta, nafta, ftaa than it is to tpp, apec, etc.
the tpp isn't going to create a flood of migrants. is that a factor in the lack of opposition to it?
http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/19843-trans-pacific-partnership-we-will-not-obey-building-a-global-resistance-movement-to-transnational-corporate-power
i'm going to ask a difficult question.
do you think it's easier to generate opposition to trade agreements in the western hemisphere due to racism around migrant issues? if not, why is opposition so much stronger to agreements like cafta, nafta, ftaa than it is to tpp, apec, etc.
the tpp isn't going to create a flood of migrants. is that a factor in the lack of opposition to it?
http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/19843-trans-pacific-partnership-we-will-not-obey-building-a-global-resistance-movement-to-transnational-corporate-power
i haven't looked into this, but, generally, areas that are not under treaty are considered to be owned in allodial by the state and parcelled out in aboriginal title to the inhabitants if they can prove use relative to a complex and sort of trivial set of clauses. i don't see why that would be different here.
it's a little weird that they're doing this through court battles, though, rather than treaty. yet, i guess that's what got forced on to them by the logging.
i'd expect the court to rule something along the lines of that a treaty negotiation needs to be started. it would be under the treaty that questions of logging and land-sharing would be discussed.
i know the nisga'a agreement implements some aboriginal concepts of land ownership, which are generally not exclusive. hunting grounds, for example, were often shared by multiple groups of people.
ironically, that's part of the reason that settlers were able to set up here so easily. the indigenous peoples on the *atlantic* coast largely only considered the areas directly around their settlements to be under their ownership. the rest of the land was owned by a 'creator' and free for general use. the settlers badly took advantage of that.
so, generally, these cases only wish to exert *explicit* ownership over the areas they live, and *joint* ownership over the areas they rely on for fishing and game. which is of course confusing in the british court system, although there are precedents - there were commons all over britain, as they are remembered today by the tragedy of the commons if by nothing else.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/key-b-c-aboriginal-land-claim-case-starts-before-supreme-court-1.2418130
well, ok, there's a framework in place - indicating that the government implicitly acknowledges the claim.
http://www.gov.bc.ca/arr/treaty/key/down/tsilhqotin_sea_amended.pdf
it's a little weird that they're doing this through court battles, though, rather than treaty. yet, i guess that's what got forced on to them by the logging.
i'd expect the court to rule something along the lines of that a treaty negotiation needs to be started. it would be under the treaty that questions of logging and land-sharing would be discussed.
i know the nisga'a agreement implements some aboriginal concepts of land ownership, which are generally not exclusive. hunting grounds, for example, were often shared by multiple groups of people.
ironically, that's part of the reason that settlers were able to set up here so easily. the indigenous peoples on the *atlantic* coast largely only considered the areas directly around their settlements to be under their ownership. the rest of the land was owned by a 'creator' and free for general use. the settlers badly took advantage of that.
so, generally, these cases only wish to exert *explicit* ownership over the areas they live, and *joint* ownership over the areas they rely on for fishing and game. which is of course confusing in the british court system, although there are precedents - there were commons all over britain, as they are remembered today by the tragedy of the commons if by nothing else.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/key-b-c-aboriginal-land-claim-case-starts-before-supreme-court-1.2418130
well, ok, there's a framework in place - indicating that the government implicitly acknowledges the claim.
http://www.gov.bc.ca/arr/treaty/key/down/tsilhqotin_sea_amended.pdf
re: the recent shift in american strategy on iran.
i wouldn't expect the americans to stop the cyber-attacks, the sanctions or the attempts to stir internal revolt any time soon. reducing iran to a puppet regime remains an american strategic objective, so regime change is likely to remain an active goal.
but, as iran integrates more and more into military alliance with china and russia, the military option is becoming increasingly infeasible. and don't think this has nothing to do with syria.
that's forcing the americans to rethink how they deal with iran. i'd expect them to stop treating iran like an unruly lost colony and start treating it the same way it treats countries like china and russia - passive aggression.
that's going to piss off the israelis. more importantly, it's going to piss off the saudis. there's going to be some consequences. but there's not much they can do - iran has found a way out of this.
http://rt.com/op-edge/iran-sco-membership-summit-nato-821/
i wouldn't expect the americans to stop the cyber-attacks, the sanctions or the attempts to stir internal revolt any time soon. reducing iran to a puppet regime remains an american strategic objective, so regime change is likely to remain an active goal.
but, as iran integrates more and more into military alliance with china and russia, the military option is becoming increasingly infeasible. and don't think this has nothing to do with syria.
that's forcing the americans to rethink how they deal with iran. i'd expect them to stop treating iran like an unruly lost colony and start treating it the same way it treats countries like china and russia - passive aggression.
that's going to piss off the israelis. more importantly, it's going to piss off the saudis. there's going to be some consequences. but there's not much they can do - iran has found a way out of this.
http://rt.com/op-edge/iran-sco-membership-summit-nato-821/
yeah, my analysis only works in canada, where the bubble is being propped up by banks.
it's hard to see how this mess ends except with mass homelessness, as idiotic as that is in a country with so much housing supply. yet, that sows the seeds of revolt. it's what is happening down there.
so, expect to see more squatting, and more riots when the cops get increasingly aggressive about it. more people in jail for being homeless. where's the breaking point?
http://www.theatlanticcities.com/housing/2013/11/why-your-rent-rising-faster-inflation/7484/
it's hard to see how this mess ends except with mass homelessness, as idiotic as that is in a country with so much housing supply. yet, that sows the seeds of revolt. it's what is happening down there.
so, expect to see more squatting, and more riots when the cops get increasingly aggressive about it. more people in jail for being homeless. where's the breaking point?
http://www.theatlanticcities.com/housing/2013/11/why-your-rent-rising-faster-inflation/7484/
i don't think that "islamism" has a single source, but i don't think it's much of a reaction to zionism, either. the dominant force was probably soviet influence. the soviets were fundamental in organizing states in syria, iraq and elsewhere that were based on a concept of "arabic socialism". as in other places (east asia, africa, south america), the kremlin felt it was necessary to inject an ethnic component into the struggle in order to build greater solidarity. this isn't very socialist, but it happened.
the americans reacted to this by training mujahideens in afghanistan with saudi capital. this is the more direct source of the islamism we see.
counterpunch carefully straddles the line of anti-semitic conspiracy theory, and i've long been cautious of it. the articles they post often give the impression that they were written by jew haters that are toning down their language and rhetoric for polite consumption. this is one of them.
and i'm stating that from a perspective that is highly critical of israeli ethnic nationalism (i think this article does get the point right, despite it's wonky attempt to put islamic terrorism on the long list of crimes perpetuated by jews).
http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/11/04/israel-and-the-dangers-of-ethnic-nationalism/
the americans reacted to this by training mujahideens in afghanistan with saudi capital. this is the more direct source of the islamism we see.
counterpunch carefully straddles the line of anti-semitic conspiracy theory, and i've long been cautious of it. the articles they post often give the impression that they were written by jew haters that are toning down their language and rhetoric for polite consumption. this is one of them.
and i'm stating that from a perspective that is highly critical of israeli ethnic nationalism (i think this article does get the point right, despite it's wonky attempt to put islamic terrorism on the long list of crimes perpetuated by jews).
http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/11/04/israel-and-the-dangers-of-ethnic-nationalism/
what is morality? for some people, it's something innate - something
they feel. yet, that's probably an illusion. why do they feel that way?
my hypothesis is that people look to educational sources to try and understand morality - that it's entirely taught. those sources may be parents, teachers, philosophers. i've tended to prefer logicians, and have come out a secular humanist. for most people, though, the source is religion.
the ancient hebrew religion derived catastrophe as a result of turning away from god. byzantine religion assigned military defeat to impiety. modern calvinistic american religion argues that the poor are poor because it is their own fault - they are poor because god assigned them that way, like the untouchables in india. our collective lack of empathy stems from our collective concepts of morality. to change this, we need a religious revolution.
...preferably one to secular humanism....
http://truth-out.org/news/item/19780-are-heartless-people-simply-born-that-way
http://www.nyu.edu/gsas/dept/politics/faculty/mead/V53.0395/Kahl.pdf
my hypothesis is that people look to educational sources to try and understand morality - that it's entirely taught. those sources may be parents, teachers, philosophers. i've tended to prefer logicians, and have come out a secular humanist. for most people, though, the source is religion.
the ancient hebrew religion derived catastrophe as a result of turning away from god. byzantine religion assigned military defeat to impiety. modern calvinistic american religion argues that the poor are poor because it is their own fault - they are poor because god assigned them that way, like the untouchables in india. our collective lack of empathy stems from our collective concepts of morality. to change this, we need a religious revolution.
...preferably one to secular humanism....
http://truth-out.org/news/item/19780-are-heartless-people-simply-born-that-way
http://www.nyu.edu/gsas/dept/politics/faculty/mead/V53.0395/Kahl.pdf
actually, they're both wrong. in the current economy, what's going to happen to that stimulus money is that it's going to go to pay down debt.
http://www.advisorperspectives.com/newsletters13/26-debate2.php
(stiglitz is more right though. and the argument about wage stagnation being an impediment to economic recovery, if not the outright cause of the current recession, is what i was looking for.)
see, i agree with stiglitz here, too. i think what krugman is saying is that percentages don't matter - it's the absolute amount that does. i'll agree with that. but krugman is citing a correlation. the question is whether there's a cause and effect relationship between tax cuts for the rich and spending by the rich, and the idea doesn't strike me as reasonable.
the upper middle class, maybe. the middle class? depends on the indebtedness. see, the hard part is finding where that line is. that requires some empirical analysis, not a deductive approach, and i'm not going to do that.
but it doesn't approach the real issue, which is indebtedness. and contrary to the calvinist media narrative, this isn't caused by some kind of entitlement but simply by historically low real wages.
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/01/20/inequality-and-recovery/
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/01/19/inequality-is-holding-back-the-recovery/
http://www.advisorperspectives.com/newsletters13/26-debate2.php
(stiglitz is more right though. and the argument about wage stagnation being an impediment to economic recovery, if not the outright cause of the current recession, is what i was looking for.)
see, i agree with stiglitz here, too. i think what krugman is saying is that percentages don't matter - it's the absolute amount that does. i'll agree with that. but krugman is citing a correlation. the question is whether there's a cause and effect relationship between tax cuts for the rich and spending by the rich, and the idea doesn't strike me as reasonable.
the upper middle class, maybe. the middle class? depends on the indebtedness. see, the hard part is finding where that line is. that requires some empirical analysis, not a deductive approach, and i'm not going to do that.
but it doesn't approach the real issue, which is indebtedness. and contrary to the calvinist media narrative, this isn't caused by some kind of entitlement but simply by historically low real wages.
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/01/20/inequality-and-recovery/
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/01/19/inequality-is-holding-back-the-recovery/
the reagan deficits were the result of absurd war spending. they're comparable to the wwII and civil war deficits.
i think he makes some worthwhile points about why keynesian policy cannot work in an open economy, and why offshoring doesn't lead to comparative advantage. well, these are points i've made myself. i have a rant somewhere that explains the failure of free trade due to the size of the asian industrial reserve army (the trade is goods for labour, not goods for goods, so people are the commodity here, which is not inconsistent with ricardo's example, but creates a situation where free trade is impossible).
krugman, i also agree, is out of touch. he's living in the world that existed before clinton. ironic? maybe, but it's true.
that doesn't mean i think sovereign deficits matter.
they don't.
i wish stiglitz carried a higher media footprint than krugman.
i should point out that my marxism up there is vulgar; i don't think the point is lost, nor do you even really need to use marxist language to get to the basic point that massive supplies of asian labour decrease labour prices - which is exactly why labour is concentrated there.
see, and it *is* a comparative advantage if you identify the actors as multinationals and consumers. higher profits, lower costs. but it's not sustainable, because it cuts into buying power, which collapses both economies in the long run.
(not to mention the horrific living conditions that it assigns to asian workers)
but that analysis relies on understanding the trade as labour for goods rather than goods for goods, which is closer to colonial mercantilism than free market economics. as the differences in population are so dramatic, which means labour costs will always be lower on one side, it's almost impossible to construct a scenario where free market trade can actually function to a real comparative advantage on a good-for-good basis. you'd have to construct global wage requirements, which maybe aren't a bad idea, but the result of that is going to be a return to local production - rather than create a system of widespread mutually advantageous trade, we'd have a system of minimal trade where the advantage is actually mutual based on accesses to resources.
...which isn't really market-based at all. it's a perversion of the concept of comparative advantage, which is in fact partially based on labour costs!
i'm not the first person to point this out. the idea of large scale free trade agreements is entirely incoherent. it's just a reduction of liberal economics to a tool of propaganda in which to spread mercantilism with.
the key point i'm trying to get across is that any analysis of the situation has to begin with the understanding that there are three billion people in asia competing for a relatively small number of jobs, that labour costs in those countries are a reflection of that reality more so than they are of any statist policy and that strategies for increasing wages in the long term in these areas while maintaining such a high population density (something that is necessary to reconstruct economies in the 'developed world', so long as open borders are maintained) are extremely difficult to grapple with.
can fordism operate in such high population densities?
i think he makes some worthwhile points about why keynesian policy cannot work in an open economy, and why offshoring doesn't lead to comparative advantage. well, these are points i've made myself. i have a rant somewhere that explains the failure of free trade due to the size of the asian industrial reserve army (the trade is goods for labour, not goods for goods, so people are the commodity here, which is not inconsistent with ricardo's example, but creates a situation where free trade is impossible).
krugman, i also agree, is out of touch. he's living in the world that existed before clinton. ironic? maybe, but it's true.
that doesn't mean i think sovereign deficits matter.
they don't.
i wish stiglitz carried a higher media footprint than krugman.
i should point out that my marxism up there is vulgar; i don't think the point is lost, nor do you even really need to use marxist language to get to the basic point that massive supplies of asian labour decrease labour prices - which is exactly why labour is concentrated there.
see, and it *is* a comparative advantage if you identify the actors as multinationals and consumers. higher profits, lower costs. but it's not sustainable, because it cuts into buying power, which collapses both economies in the long run.
(not to mention the horrific living conditions that it assigns to asian workers)
but that analysis relies on understanding the trade as labour for goods rather than goods for goods, which is closer to colonial mercantilism than free market economics. as the differences in population are so dramatic, which means labour costs will always be lower on one side, it's almost impossible to construct a scenario where free market trade can actually function to a real comparative advantage on a good-for-good basis. you'd have to construct global wage requirements, which maybe aren't a bad idea, but the result of that is going to be a return to local production - rather than create a system of widespread mutually advantageous trade, we'd have a system of minimal trade where the advantage is actually mutual based on accesses to resources.
...which isn't really market-based at all. it's a perversion of the concept of comparative advantage, which is in fact partially based on labour costs!
i'm not the first person to point this out. the idea of large scale free trade agreements is entirely incoherent. it's just a reduction of liberal economics to a tool of propaganda in which to spread mercantilism with.
the key point i'm trying to get across is that any analysis of the situation has to begin with the understanding that there are three billion people in asia competing for a relatively small number of jobs, that labour costs in those countries are a reflection of that reality more so than they are of any statist policy and that strategies for increasing wages in the long term in these areas while maintaining such a high population density (something that is necessary to reconstruct economies in the 'developed world', so long as open borders are maintained) are extremely difficult to grapple with.
can fordism operate in such high population densities?
not that there’s anything wrong with that (original album mix)
this is that faux-homophobe song again, and i'm going to call myself
out for it this time on two levels. i'm kind of uncomfortable uploading
it not once but twice, but i promised myself i'd upload everything, so
here it is.
i've been uncomfortable with this since i wrote it, basically. i really hesitated for a while in releasing this. it was one of the first things i recorded with my new 4-track (the timestamp is jan 17, 1998), but it didn't make it to the first demo. it only made it to the second demo in feb, 1999. with a lot of caution. i ended up releasing it because i liked the fact that it sounded like ministry.
in my defense, i should point out that these kinds of songs exist in the punk rock tradition going back to the glam days. ministry wrote a number of songs like this, ridiculing exaggerated masculinity. this is what i was going for the second time around. further, in the sense that the song is about me being picked on, i feel i sort of retain the right to express myself about it.
where it falls into trouble is it's level of ambiguity. it's meant to be satire, but how is anybody supposed to know that? the answer is the seinfeld line - and this was consciously inserted for that very reason. yet, the signal that sends isn't "this song is sarcastic" so much as it is "homophobes aren't the brightest people". that's really what the song is about - i was getting picked on by people i didn't think were very smart, and i was reacting by ridiculing their intelligence through merely repeating what they were saying. this is meant to shock, and that's where the track gets it's "edge".
we would refer to such a thing nowadays as "hipster homophobia", and this is where i'm calling myself out, here. my argument is essentially "it's ok to be hateful if you're being ironic". but, that's not an argument i would currently make - it's an argument that i'd argue rather strenuously against.
again: i feel i had the right to express myself here, and the song is anti-oppressive in it's intent. yet, i didn't articulate that well, and sort of fell into a trap. i can convincingly argue that i was a teenager and didn't really know any better, but that argument necessitates that i correct myself.
the original version and write-up are over here:
jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/not-that-theres-anything-wrong-with-that
recorded in jan, 1998.
http://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/06-not-that-theres-anything-wrong-with-that
i've been uncomfortable with this since i wrote it, basically. i really hesitated for a while in releasing this. it was one of the first things i recorded with my new 4-track (the timestamp is jan 17, 1998), but it didn't make it to the first demo. it only made it to the second demo in feb, 1999. with a lot of caution. i ended up releasing it because i liked the fact that it sounded like ministry.
in my defense, i should point out that these kinds of songs exist in the punk rock tradition going back to the glam days. ministry wrote a number of songs like this, ridiculing exaggerated masculinity. this is what i was going for the second time around. further, in the sense that the song is about me being picked on, i feel i sort of retain the right to express myself about it.
where it falls into trouble is it's level of ambiguity. it's meant to be satire, but how is anybody supposed to know that? the answer is the seinfeld line - and this was consciously inserted for that very reason. yet, the signal that sends isn't "this song is sarcastic" so much as it is "homophobes aren't the brightest people". that's really what the song is about - i was getting picked on by people i didn't think were very smart, and i was reacting by ridiculing their intelligence through merely repeating what they were saying. this is meant to shock, and that's where the track gets it's "edge".
we would refer to such a thing nowadays as "hipster homophobia", and this is where i'm calling myself out, here. my argument is essentially "it's ok to be hateful if you're being ironic". but, that's not an argument i would currently make - it's an argument that i'd argue rather strenuously against.
again: i feel i had the right to express myself here, and the song is anti-oppressive in it's intent. yet, i didn't articulate that well, and sort of fell into a trap. i can convincingly argue that i was a teenager and didn't really know any better, but that argument necessitates that i correct myself.
the original version and write-up are over here:
jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/not-that-theres-anything-wrong-with-that
recorded in jan, 1998.
http://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/06-not-that-theres-anything-wrong-with-that
cat’s apocalypse (original discarded outtake)
this is a remix of the track 'war' (http://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/11-war) that i had no intention of releasing. i was trying to irritate a cat lover (i can't recall who). epic troll, really.
i'd trigger it for cat owners, but it's really too absurd and disingenuous to be offensive.
recorded in jan, 1998.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/cats-apocalypse-1998-archive-2
i'd trigger it for cat owners, but it's really too absurd and disingenuous to be offensive.
recorded in jan, 1998.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/cats-apocalypse-1998-archive-2
slaves (original discarded outtake)
this was inspired by an snl skit. pure silliness.
recorded in jan, 1998.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/slaves
recorded in jan, 1998.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/slaves
permission (original discarded outtake)
this is the remake of permission, which is really funky and neat, but i ended up rejecting it because the guitar solo directly lifts the ending melody from "the perfect drug". i don't really remember the logic behind how it got there in the first place (did i realize after or was it purposefully meant as a 'sample'?), but i do specifically recall saying "i can't use this". i think maybe i also thought the lyrics were sort of dumb, after all.
of course, a lot of the songs on those cassette demos recycle ideas from nine inch nails, and i've cringed a few times in uploading these songs, but in the context of the tracks mostly being experiments in learning how to record music it's less of a problem for me, in hindsight, then it could be. those were things that affected me, at that age. they're there for a reason. the cassette demos were never meant to be brilliant works of original art, or even for sale at all (and they never have been). it was just something i did as a sort of a release.
these cd demos, though, were meant to be more professional. there are a few awkward samples interspersed throughout them in ways that were meaningful to me and seem questionable now looking back, but part of the reason i redid these songs in the first place was to reclaim them from myself as entirely original pieces.
my sister's backing vocals have been replaced with myself, digitally altered. there's also a lot of electronic soundscaping: this is a substantially different piece of music than the cassette demo, which is here:
http://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/permission
actually, i think i'm remembering that i put the 'sample' in on purpose because the vocals were so derivative, then kibboshed the whole thing.
yeah. i was playing the melody as i was testing levels, and i decided that it actually sounded really good - but that I couldn't use it, or i would be sealing the track as an outtake. i then decided that it should be an outtake anyways and went with it.
recorded in january, 1998.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/permission-2
of course, a lot of the songs on those cassette demos recycle ideas from nine inch nails, and i've cringed a few times in uploading these songs, but in the context of the tracks mostly being experiments in learning how to record music it's less of a problem for me, in hindsight, then it could be. those were things that affected me, at that age. they're there for a reason. the cassette demos were never meant to be brilliant works of original art, or even for sale at all (and they never have been). it was just something i did as a sort of a release.
these cd demos, though, were meant to be more professional. there are a few awkward samples interspersed throughout them in ways that were meaningful to me and seem questionable now looking back, but part of the reason i redid these songs in the first place was to reclaim them from myself as entirely original pieces.
my sister's backing vocals have been replaced with myself, digitally altered. there's also a lot of electronic soundscaping: this is a substantially different piece of music than the cassette demo, which is here:
http://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/permission
actually, i think i'm remembering that i put the 'sample' in on purpose because the vocals were so derivative, then kibboshed the whole thing.
yeah. i was playing the melody as i was testing levels, and i decided that it actually sounded really good - but that I couldn't use it, or i would be sealing the track as an outtake. i then decided that it should be an outtake anyways and went with it.
recorded in january, 1998.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/permission-2
nails (original album mix)
homer, indeed. i think that might be the ry30 with the drums, recording directly into the back of the pc.
created in the fall of 1997.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/nails
created in the fall of 1997.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/nails
war (original album mix)
the beginning is from a disney film or something, i can't recall
which one. it's all wiped away by a wash of war drums and civ2 samples.
it's more misanthropic than anti-war, really.
created in the fall of 1997.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/war
created in the fall of 1997.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/war
Saturday, November 9, 2013
catchin’ up (original album mix)
noises generated with cool edit. it seemed like the coolest thing in the world, at the time.
created in the fall of 1997.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/catchin-up
created in the fall of 1997.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/catchin-up
fuck the dead (original album mix)
well, it's a song about necrophilia. what?
this is actually the first thing i recorded in the new electronic style, and i sort of picked up where i had left off, thematically.
ok, if it's not blatantly obvious, it's entirely tongue-in-cheek and absurdist. i'm poking fun at what i'm assuming people are perceiving the spooky goth stereotype as.
i have removed a section full of painful homer samples. i put the spiderman sample in after and it's one of the things i'm most proud of, actually.
recorded in jan, 1998. edited on nov 9, 2013.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/fuck-the-dead-1998-archive
this is actually the first thing i recorded in the new electronic style, and i sort of picked up where i had left off, thematically.
ok, if it's not blatantly obvious, it's entirely tongue-in-cheek and absurdist. i'm poking fun at what i'm assuming people are perceiving the spooky goth stereotype as.
i have removed a section full of painful homer samples. i put the spiderman sample in after and it's one of the things i'm most proud of, actually.
recorded in jan, 1998. edited on nov 9, 2013.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/fuck-the-dead-1998-archive
a psycho kills a cow (original album mix)
so,
there's this dude, and he sounds sort of like one of the monsters from doom II,
and he lures a cow with a weird mating call and then attacks it and it's kind
of twisted and hilarious. subtle vegan brainwashing? yes, but more on an
environmentalist level.
created in the fall of 1997.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/a-psycho-kills-a-cow-2
created in the fall of 1997.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/a-psycho-kills-a-cow-2
about a squirrel (original album mix)
the guitar loop is taken from a popular nirvana song, whereas most of the building sound pasted on top is from civ 2. no real message here. just a particularly savvy squirrel that's getting ready for winter by building some kind of fortress.
created in the fall of 1997.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/about-a-squirrel-2
created in the fall of 1997.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/about-a-squirrel-2
skaters (original album mix)
the original version of this track, along with a write-up, is over here:
jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/skaters
this version is sped up a little bit and has some keyboard sequencing added to it but is otherwise pretty similar.
recorded in jan, 1998.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/skaters-1998-archived-112-kbps-mp3
jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/skaters
this version is sped up a little bit and has some keyboard sequencing added to it but is otherwise pretty similar.
recorded in jan, 1998.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/skaters-1998-archived-112-kbps-mp3
useless (original album mix)
kind of a new wave / synth pop track. as can be heard, i'm still not
out of the clutches of trent reznor - there's an awkward nin sample in
the middle of the track.
this is the first track with my new synth on it. that's a large part of what the track is.
this isn't the first document that demonstrates my struggle with coming to terms with the futility of existence, but maybe it's the first meaningful one. in a very real sense, that struggle has defined most of my life. listening to the lyrics now, they seem sort of trite. yet, there's a large amount of who i've become within these words.
recorded in jan, 1998.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/useless-valium-sped-up
this is the first track with my new synth on it. that's a large part of what the track is.
this isn't the first document that demonstrates my struggle with coming to terms with the futility of existence, but maybe it's the first meaningful one. in a very real sense, that struggle has defined most of my life. listening to the lyrics now, they seem sort of trite. yet, there's a large amount of who i've become within these words.
recorded in jan, 1998.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/useless-valium-sped-up
boogeyman reconstruction (discarded first vocal take)
this was recorded over the christmas holidays on my brand new 4-track. i ended up rejecting the track, then redoing the vocals for the second demo. it is itself a redone version of a track on one of the cassette demos:
http://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/boogeyman-depressed
you can hear that the drum programming was fairly meticulous here, adding all kinds of unusual sounds. there's no synths or samples here, it's all ry30.
while the strong backbeat improves part of the track, i prefer the cassette demo, overall.
recorded in dec, 1997.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/boogeyman-first-vocal-take
http://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/boogeyman-depressed
you can hear that the drum programming was fairly meticulous here, adding all kinds of unusual sounds. there's no synths or samples here, it's all ry30.
while the strong backbeat improves part of the track, i prefer the cassette demo, overall.
recorded in dec, 1997.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/boogeyman-first-vocal-take
friedrich engels - socialism: utopian & scientific
for a review of the introduction, please click here. also note that this text is taken directly from a larger work, anti-duhring. the pamphlet places three separate stages of socialism within a historical perspective, with a chapter for each stage. sequentially, these stages are utopian socialism (socialism's irrigorous past), scientific socialism (the then present, rigorous state of socialism) and communism (the eventually implemented future of socialism). engels' goal appears to be to separate what he considers to be "respectable" forms of socialism from "primitive" or "naive" forms of socialism, as well as to (ironically) act as somewhat of a socialist clairvoyant.
the utopian stage of socialism is explored through three major icons: st. stephen, charles fourier and robert owens. engels derives this stage out of the disappointment of the french revolution, the so-called "triumph of reason" that climaxed in despotism and perpetual war. according to engels, the french revolution was the product of french "materialism" and the great "materialist" philosophers of the eighteenth century who placed everything in subservience to reason. engels seems to differentiate these "materialist" philosophers from the aforementioned "socialist" philosophers by their attention to class; the french rationalists "do not claim to emancipate a particular class to begin with, but all humanity at once.", whereas st. simon speaks of the class conflict between the "workers" and the "idlers". the purpose of this section seems to be to briefly inform the reader about the roots of socialism without getting into it too much, mostly because engels doesn't want you to get into it too much. in fact, engels wants you to reject these utopian thinkers because "the more completely they (early/utopian systems of socialism) were worked out in detail, the more they could not avoid drifting into pure fantasies.". while engels does clearly hold robert owen in high regard, going so far as to say that "every social movement, every real advance england on behalf of the workers links itself to the name of robert owen.", his real interest is in what he calls "scientific socialism", which is something that he derives from marx.
the second section provides the reader with a cursory outline of the renaissance of dialectics and an explanation of how this renaissance allowed for the construction of a "materialist" history. this "materialist" history is what we would today call "marxist history", the view that history is characterized by class struggle. engels attributes this "materialist history" to marx and conflicts it with what he calls the "idealistic" (and incorrect) view that history is an unending evolutionary process, one where perfection is pushed further and further away as we reach our previous conceptions of it, which he attributes to hegel. in engels' view, this deep discovery necessitates a complete rewriting of all history (a scary proposition!) and is, along with the discovery of surplus value, one of the two breakthroughs that allowed marxism to call itself a "science", despite the loud objections of scientists, no doubt. surplus value is simply the idea that, no matter how much the capitalist pays for labour, the capitalist will always extract a greater value than he pays for labour. i'm going to assume that this is an observation and not a proposed sociological law and then note that a capitalist would both call that greater value "profit" and argue that it's the whole point.
the third section is the heart of the essay and requires a few reads to understand fully. what engels is doing, ultimately, is explaining why we need communism. in the process, he...well, to be blunt, he meanders through a variety of loosely connected historical, economic and philosophical concepts. there's quite a bit written here, but it's not written very coherently; this is more than a translation issue, it's an organization problem. no contemporary editor would let this to pressing. yet, it did make it out (twice!) so this is what we have to deal with...
engels starts off by describing the evolution in production from the medieval guildsman to the socialization of production, with the aim of deriving the natural conflict between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie. many years ago, producers were in complete control of their product from the point of gathering raw materials to the point of sale. the producer of a canoe, for example, would begin by carving the canoe and end by selling it. consequently, the producer would both set the price of the product and retain all profit from it's sale. with industrialization, however, came the socialization of production. factories were able to produce products faster and cheaper than individual guildspeople, hopelessly outcompeting them to the point that individual tradespeople became unable to exist upon their skills. faced with the loss of their only source of income, the tradespeople were forced into selling their labour to the very factories that put them out of business. such was the beginning of a new class of individuals, the proletariat - those who have no good to exchange for existence other than their labour. with this change, however, did not come a change in the way that goods are exchanged. the owners of the factories - the capitalists - became the sellers of products which they did not create on their own. so, while the goods were made by several people, they were only sold by one; engels sees this as a contradiction and labels it to the root of the class conflict between the workers and the owners of the factories, manifested as an argument over wages paid out by the capitalists to the workers. of course, both sides will seek to maximize their own share of profits at the expense of the other. at this point, engels' argument is not just reasonable but obvious; nobody disputes the existence of this class conflict or it's irresolvability without the final triumph of one side over the other.
the next thing that engels discusses is what he calls the "anarchy of production". what he's really describing is competition. in the old days, workers only produced what they were asked to produced. that aforementioned canoe would not have been randomly built and sold in a marketplace; an agreement would have been reached with the buyer before the canoe was built. with industrialization, however, goods were just produced with the hope that they would be sold eventually. as multiple factories/companies ended up doing this, often producing the same surplus goods, a type of competition that was hitherto unknown began to develop. engels has a distinct distaste for this; he describes competition using words such as "anarchy" and "animalistic", blames it for the existence of commercial wars and even goes so far as to claim that the struggle between individual companies is darwinian in nature. he once again sees this conflict between organized and chaotic production as a symptom of the contradiction between capitalistic appropriation and socialized production.
engels then turns to the topic of machinery replacing human labour, inevitably resulting in labour surpluses, which he calls the "industrial reserve army". these labour surpluses then reduce wages through market forces, which destroys the market altogether because the increasingly unemployed workers have no buying power beyond subsistence. the capitalists must consequently search for foreign markets to sell the goods produced by the workers. the process is consequently one of wealth trickling upwards to a select few, leaving a mass of starving slaves to work the machines that are unable to afford to purchase the very good that they make. furthermore, engels sees this as inevitable within any capitalist society. production consequently must seek greater and greater foreign markets to justify it's own existence, which is of course impossible. as mechanization increases, production increases faster than markets are able to grow, leading to surpluses of goods and subsequent market crashes; this is the marxist explanation for recessions, and while we may argue today that it's a little over-simplified, it's basically correct. this is also considered to be inherent within market capitalism and an inescapable implication of the anarchy of production, as demonstrated by the historical fact of boom and bust cycles.
engels finishes the essay by outlining what he sees as the necessary and correct ordering of steps involved in a communist revolution. first, the capitalists must recognize the social nature of production. once they have fully understood this aspect of the nature of production, they will understand that the most efficient way to exploit workers and markets is to form trusts, or monopolies. however, as engels puts it, "no nation will put up with production conducted by trusts, with so barefaced an exploitation of the community by a small band of dividend-mongers", so the trusts will inevitably eventually be placed directly under the direct control of the state, reducing the capitalists to mere bureaucrats. engels does not see this as a final solution because he views the state as a crude means for the capitalists to control the workers in the first place; within a marxist framework, the final solution is the end of the state altogether. it is truly the class relation that is abolished by reducing the capitalists to proletarians, as they now *also* must rely *only* upon their labour to survive. the class struggle consequently absolves itself along with class itself, anarchy in production is replaced with order and the state ceases to exist along with it's justification for existence, exploitation based on class. the emancipation is total - not just of the proletariat, but of all of society from the violence of the class relation.
i'm going to restrict my brief critical analysis to the very last part of the essay and reduce it to the fact that engels has completely ignored the third class, the aristocracy, which is of course still present in society and in government in some way or another, either through direct power or through indirect, financial power. the term "dictatorship of the proletariat" is not used here, but the concept is also essentially aristocratic. so long as the aristocracy still exists, the reduction of the bourgeoisie to the proletariat will obviously merely result in the reconstruction of a feudal relation, and i don't mean to offer an alternate proof of hayek's thesis. to be fair, it must have been assumed that the aristocracy was initially eliminated in the bourgeois revolution, but this does not accurately reflect any historical bourgeois revolution. an active mechanism to reduce the aristocracy to wage slavery must also be incorporated, lest socialism become a road to serfdom.
full text:
http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/download/Engels_Socialism_Utopian_and_Scientific.pdf
http://dghjdfsghkrdghdgja.appspot.com/categories/books/congress/HX/276.E55/index.html
friedrich engels - on historical materialism
required reading
"on historical materialism" is the title present in the feuer text, but the essay (which is the introduction to the 1892 edition of socialism: utopian and scientific) has apparently also been subsequently published as a standalone text. the core of the essay compares and contrasts the approaches of the british and continental aristocracies to the question of religion, coming to the conclusion that the british aristocracy took a much more "effective" approach in controlling its population.
the essay begins with a defence of "materialism", which engels defines as a peculiarly english philosophy ultimately rooted in bacon's scientific method. to bacon, and apparently engels, "natural philosophy" (the archaic name for "science") is the only true philosophy. however, bacon was also an alchemist; it was only through the further development of hobbes and locke that english materialism, in a fully atheist form, was to be exported to france for still further development. the point that engels is trying to make is twofold: (1) that materialism had it's roots and origins within england and not france or germany as may have been popularly thought at the time and (2) that despite the advancements in thought that were occurring in english universities, the "unwashed masses" of english peasants and the bourgeoisie were still deeply ignorant and deeply religious.
engels also separates materialism from both agnosticism and deism in case there was any question as to the atheistic nature of what he is proposing. he casts aside deism without so much as a second thought by quoting marx as follows "deism is but an easygoing way of getting rid of religion". he spills much more ink on agnosticism but does not give it much more respect. agnosticism, according to engels, is an archaic approach to the question of religion because the science of the day had discarded the necessity of a creator. of what value is a creator if it is not accountable for the creation? he further derides agnostics as materialists in all but name by going through a long-winded argument that is essentially little more than a summary of hegel's response to kant...
if i may interject, i'd like to point out that this introductory section will probably come off as largely juvenile by today's standards. after all, the double-slit experiment (and quantum physics in general) is enough to go back to taking kant seriously again. the contempt that engels shows for his irrational, ignorant opponents actually makes him come off as somewhat of an atheist fundamentalist, which also characterizes the text with a large dosage of irony.
this cursory delve into the mainstream philosophical questions of the day aside, the text is actually primarily a brief history lesson. it places the three major battles of the bourgeoisie against the aristocracy within the context of the english and continental approaches to religion. central to marxist history is, of course, the idea of class struggle, particularly between three classes: the aristocracy, the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. also keep in mind that the purpose of religion within a marxist framework is, of course, to control the population....
the first battle between the aristocracy and the bourgeoisie was the reformation. marx keys in on two of the many reformers, luther and calvin, in order to contrast what happened in england with what happened in germany. in germany, the aristocracy won handily; lutheranism became, like roman christianity, a deeply feudal religion. calvin, on the other hand, produced republican movements in holland, scotland and england, the latter of which led to the second struggle, the "glorious revolution". this "glorious" revolution, however, was somewhat of a failure; the english aristocracy had actually defeated the upstart bourgeoisie, placed it back under its own subservience and left it in philosophical ignorance. enlightened philosophies such as materialism continued to be hoarded by the aristocracy; the bourgeoisie languished in the ignorance of christianity. on the continent, however, materialism flourished and with it came the third battle, the french revolution. according to engels, the french revolution was the first time that the bourgeoisie successfully usurped power from the aristocracy (for a brief time).
while the french revolution was occurring in france, the industrial revolution was occurring in england. by definition, the primary beneficiaries of the industrial revolution would be the english bourgeoisie, who finally saw their power eclipse the aristocracy - through peaceful, financial means and not through violent class struggle. the bourgeoisie then used that newfound financial power to gain political power by passing bills through parliament, such as the reform act. in other words, they legislated themselves into power; however, they were never able to push the aristocracy out of power. a second conclusion of the industrial revolution was the creation of a new class, the proletariat, which began for the first time to organize politically through the creation of new parties, such as the chartists in england. all of that led to the first uprisings of the proletariat, in 1848, which were crushed not by the bourgeoisie but by the aristocracy. interestingly, engels notes that the british aristocracy responded to these uprisings by increasing funding for religious proselytization across the country side.
the years after 1848 saw increasing unrest amongst the proletariat throughout europe, especially in germany. again, engels points out that the bourgeoisie and aristocracy came to the common conclusion that, in order to prevent the "destruction of society", the working class must be evangelized. in england, no such approach was necessary because the british aristocracy had already spent lavishly on maintaining a religious proletariat and bourgeoisie; engels comes to his key statement of the essay while discussing this,
They had come to grief with materialism. "Die Religion muss dem Volk erhalten werden" — religion must be kept alive for the people — that was the only and the last means to save society from utter ruin. Unfortunately for themselves, they did not find this out until they had done their level best to break up religion for ever. And now it was the turn of the British bourgeoisie to sneer and to say: "Why, you fools, I could have told you that 200 years ago!"
engels ends the essay by deducing that germany, not england, will be the scene of the first proletarian revolution.
full text:
http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/download/Engels_Socialism_Utopian_and_Scientific.pdf
http://dghjdfsghkrdghdgja.appspot.com/categories/books/congress/D/16.9.E57/index.html
http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/19565-americas-new-employment-reality
http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/19553-why-the-climate-movement-should-have-no-keystone
http://truth-out.org/news/item/19564-growing-clash-between-immigrant-rights-activists-and-washington-power-brokers
here, thom hartmann fails to realize that the reason liberals are more frightening than conservatives is that they understand how capitalism works.
http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/19592-stop-treating-capitalists-like-theyre-gods
http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/19692-obamacare-the-biggest-insurance-scam-in-history
http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/19553-why-the-climate-movement-should-have-no-keystone
http://truth-out.org/news/item/19564-growing-clash-between-immigrant-rights-activists-and-washington-power-brokers
here, thom hartmann fails to realize that the reason liberals are more frightening than conservatives is that they understand how capitalism works.
http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/19592-stop-treating-capitalists-like-theyre-gods
http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/19692-obamacare-the-biggest-insurance-scam-in-history
this article got some push back; hedges is widely seen as a reactionary liberal and is not particularly well regarded on the left.
my feed has been weird recently. a few days ago, i realized democracy now disappeared about a month ago. truthout disappeared about two weeks ago. the solution is easy: unlike, wait five minutes, like. why this is happening in the first place, i don't know. democracy now and truthout are both popular sources of fairly *centrist* news perspectives. they're both pro-capitalist; neither are very far from the democrats. if somebody is targeting these sources for being radical, that's just hilarious. only in america?
so, yeah, the hedges article that got some pushback. i think he's being pretentious and don't want to really fall into the trap. we expect pretension from the likes of chris hedges. it's probably better to point it out and then ignore it.
he's not completely wrong, and i've never argued that he is. when he talks about the pointlessness of property damage (and he calls that violence, why i don't know - his point would be better taken if he'd say property damage), he makes good sense and has the potential to hold an audience. nor are many people going to disagree that non-violence is preferable to violence in theory - even if there's disagreement about whether meaningful, systemic peaceful change is actually possible or not. it's only when he rejects violence on a dogmatic, ideological level that people start calling him a liberal reactionary - and for good reason, because that's what his arguments logically imply.
this article seems to suggest that he doesn't really understand the criticism. quoting emma goldman to present a position of dogmatic non-violence? listen, he could quote god herself, it wouldn't matter. what's being rejected, chris, is your dogmatism, your suggestion that violence is always wrong under any circumstance. as anarchists, we reject the idea because it's dogmatic, not because we like violence. responding with what you perceive to be your opponent's dogma is just really head-scratching.
but, as mentioned, he's really just being pretentious, and it's better just to ignore it - except to point out that if somebody could convince him to be less dogmatic then having him on board would be an asset.
http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/19658-our-invisible-revolution
my feed has been weird recently. a few days ago, i realized democracy now disappeared about a month ago. truthout disappeared about two weeks ago. the solution is easy: unlike, wait five minutes, like. why this is happening in the first place, i don't know. democracy now and truthout are both popular sources of fairly *centrist* news perspectives. they're both pro-capitalist; neither are very far from the democrats. if somebody is targeting these sources for being radical, that's just hilarious. only in america?
so, yeah, the hedges article that got some pushback. i think he's being pretentious and don't want to really fall into the trap. we expect pretension from the likes of chris hedges. it's probably better to point it out and then ignore it.
he's not completely wrong, and i've never argued that he is. when he talks about the pointlessness of property damage (and he calls that violence, why i don't know - his point would be better taken if he'd say property damage), he makes good sense and has the potential to hold an audience. nor are many people going to disagree that non-violence is preferable to violence in theory - even if there's disagreement about whether meaningful, systemic peaceful change is actually possible or not. it's only when he rejects violence on a dogmatic, ideological level that people start calling him a liberal reactionary - and for good reason, because that's what his arguments logically imply.
this article seems to suggest that he doesn't really understand the criticism. quoting emma goldman to present a position of dogmatic non-violence? listen, he could quote god herself, it wouldn't matter. what's being rejected, chris, is your dogmatism, your suggestion that violence is always wrong under any circumstance. as anarchists, we reject the idea because it's dogmatic, not because we like violence. responding with what you perceive to be your opponent's dogma is just really head-scratching.
but, as mentioned, he's really just being pretentious, and it's better just to ignore it - except to point out that if somebody could convince him to be less dogmatic then having him on board would be an asset.
http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/19658-our-invisible-revolution
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)