Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
Paul Krugman: Ooo, What a Giveaway
In the November 15 issue of Rolling Stone, one more in their continuing series of 40th anniversary celebrations, this time centering on interviews with Big Thinkers, Paul Krugman is in the mix.
Asked to name his great inspiration, he says: Isaac Asimov's Foundation series--a tale of super social scientists who can accurately pinpoint laws of mass social behavior that allow them to predict, and manipulate, all of human civilization and future history. "That's always what I wanted to be," saith the economist turned pundit. Good luck with that project, Dr. Krugman.
Previous Rolling Stone 40th anniversary blogging by me here and here.
|11.3.07 @ 12:36AM|#
The Foundation Series fascinated me when I was in my teens - the
notion of a Mathematically Exact Social Science which could bring
peace and justice was exhilarating.
The older I got, however, the more I realized the totalitarian
implications of such a science. The novels are really quite
repulsive.
|11.3.07 @ 12:39AM|#
I'm trying to shoot for something a bit more humble, like I don't know, creating my own universe, with my own race of sentient beings to manipulate...oh wait...
thoreau|11.3.07 @ 12:46AM|#
I used to be friends with a guy who claimed that all of the
world could be understood if I just studied the Foundation novels
and the electoral college.
I'm pretty sure he was stoned when he said it. For that matter, I'm
pretty sure he was stoned most of the time.
|11.3.07 @ 12:48AM|#
As I recall, and this is goin' way back, didn't "the Mule" mess that super-scientist's shit up?
|11.3.07 @ 1:00AM|#
Ken Schultz
You're right. The Mule conquered the First Foundation, but was
beaten by the Second Foundation. Asimov had to do a little twisting
of his major premise to make that come out right. I still remember
my outrage when I realized that "Preem Palaver" (sp?) was the First
Speaker of the Second Foundation. Of all the cheap-shot, Asimovian
puns....
|11.3.07 @ 1:01AM|#
DR.T,
I remember that I read the foundation trilogy during the years that
I was ALWAYS stoned.
I remember virtually no details. I don't remember thinking much
about the electoral college in those days.
But to be fair, I don't remember much from those days.
I wonder if we hung out.
|11.3.07 @ 1:03AM|#
Well it was a hell of a good premise. You could say all Seldon
was trying to do was tuck away a little 'restart' capital for
rebuilding the galaxy. Trade was the primary means by which the
Foundation brought 'civilization' back to the galaxy, at least in
the early books. The whole thing did make for a bit of a weird
story arc once you realized the good guys always win without trying
('til The Mule came along anyway).
At least Krugman didn't say he wanted to be like the members of the
Second Foundation.
|11.3.07 @ 1:40AM|#
Ha Ha, Brain Doherty, you're too funnay! So snarky!
And what books were you reading and what did you want to be when
you were a kid?
Do you get paid for this shit?
iih|11.3.07 @ 2:03AM|#
OK, since there is no weekend thread (or is it not the weekend yet?), NPR's All Things Considered played a segment from Ron Paul's recent excellent talk addressed to the Arab American Anti-Discrimination league. Here it is. (The segment before they had Lieberman on defending the recent Congress resolutions against Iran. So it was great to hear Paul after that. It will give a lot of attention to him amongst the anti-war NPR listeners. So I recommend first listening to the two segments preceding Paul's linked segment to give context).
iih|11.3.07 @ 2:05AM|#
Since NPR was mentioned (I know this is off topic, but where is my weekend thread?), I wonder wy the animosity by libertarians towards NPR? Is it because of the 13% of their revenue that comes from the Federal government? This always bewildered me.
iih|11.3.07 @ 2:14AM|#
correction: It was the Arab American Institute. The full speech can be found here.
|11.3.07 @ 2:30AM|#
Krugman is such a jackass! As a kid, he wanted to learn more
about the science that saved an entire Galaxy from a dark age. OMG!
Think of what he could have been doing? He could have been
masturbating to Ayn Rand telling him the beauty of being a selfish
arrogant prick.
good luck on your project doherty. i'm glad you were reading the
right books.
|11.3.07 @ 4:46AM|#
i'm glad you were reading the right books.
You must read Frank Miller's "The Dark Knight Strikes Again".
Probably the most punk rock satire I've evr read.
|11.3.07 @ 4:58AM|#
accurately pinpoint laws of mass social behavior
"Pinpoint"- That's the rub. Free society is made of freely acting
individuals such that pinpointing laws is out of the question. The
freer the individuals in society, the harder it is to predict. The
threat is that folks like Paul Krugman are all too willing to
impose coercion so that their dreams of predictability are more
attainable.
In Jr high school, a free economy was made appealing to me by, of
all people; Robert Heilbroner. In his The Making of Economic
Society. In explaining capitalism, he said something like:
"What keeps prices from going too high? The market. What keeps
goods on the shelves to buy? The market. What keeps causing the
creation of better products for people to buy? The market"
RC|11.3.07 @ 7:49AM|#
The thing I find most interesting in the Foundation is their lack of ability to predict or manipulate the weather. Even in science fiction global warming cannot be caused by man.
|11.3.07 @ 7:57AM|#
"Even in science fiction global warming cannot be caused by
man."
Cheap shot! Joe will put your balls in a microwave and show you
what global warming is all about for that remark.
Fluffy|11.3.07 @ 9:03AM|#
Rectal -
What you and Krugman fail to see is the unfathomable arrogance of
the Foundation's psychohistory in its basic conception.
The notion that all human action can be predicted and controlled in
the aggregate requires a vast conceit. The minds of the scientists
must be able to contain within them the minds of everyone else -
and not only to contain them, but to be able to isolate them for
study, and to play with them like brightly colored balls. That's
truly shocking megalomania.
In many ways Seldon is the anti-Hayek, whose basic premise was that
human behavior is too complex for central planning. Seldon, and
Asimov, acknowledge the complexity, but just laugh and say, "No
matter, us god-scientists will simply overcome that."
|11.3.07 @ 9:19AM|#
psssst. Hey Paul, it's science fiction. Nice
premise to hang your career from.
It was a long time ago, but I couldn't make it through even the
first book in the Foundation series. It was tough slogging and
eventually I just put it down out of boredom. And I generally like
Asimov.
On that note, I just finished reading Peter Hamliton's 2,000 page,
2-book Pandora's Star series. A bit pedantic at times, but
a very complelling story line and good cast of characters. Needed a
dramatis persona in the first one, but did have one in the 2nd.
There are so many characters, I was forgetting who was who, but
didn't feel like going back and figuring out where they came
in.
Still a good read and well worth the investment of time.
Mark Bahner|11.3.07 @ 9:26AM|#
The thing I find most interesting in the Foundation is their lack of ability to predict or manipulate the weather. Even in science fiction global warming cannot be caused by man.
Well, the books that *I* was reading that had the biggest
impression on me included Robert Heinlein's "Farmer in the Sky,"
and "The Door into Summer."
Farmer in the Sky involved terraforming Jupiter's moon, Ganymede.
And you bet your bippy (as we used to in those days) that those
folks could control global temperature!
P.S. As well as going from Earth to Jupiter in a few weeks in
fusion-powered ships. (It's really pathetic that NASA isn't working
on those.)
|11.3.07 @ 9:31AM|#
How amusing! It is always so funny when a left "liberal" icon is
criticized and all the mental cases come out of the woodwork to
fart on about Ayn Rand and the adenoidal girly men at NPR
(journalists who typically have a "voice for the print media"
rofl).
One would have thought Klugman's favorite literature would have
been the Tales of the Brothers Grimm, since he is Fibby, one of
Snow White's little men.
Russell|11.3.07 @ 10:25AM|#
Oddly, Asimov's 'young adult' fiction translated into Arabic,
and RAND reports abound in rumors that OBL is a fan of the late
great Ike.
These were universally discounted, but as many recall Al Gore
heartily endorsing Dune in his stoner days, and what with his since
having claimed to strat the Butlerian Jihad, who's to deny Ike
Asimov his place in history alongside the other greats of the
pulpopod era, like Ron Hubbard?
|11.3.07 @ 10:32AM|#
ihh, perhaps you can confirm this, I understand that "The
Foundation" was translated in Arabic as "Al Qaeda."
Coincidence? Perhaps...
|11.3.07 @ 10:34AM|#
Speaking of coincidences, I posted the above independent of
Russell.
I just got chills!
Pete|11.3.07 @ 10:38AM|#
Hey didnt asimov write a 4th and 5th book too, where the
protagonist gets laid by big breasted women? i could swear i read
those when i was a teen... nothing like authors getting old and
pervy!
"The minds of the scientists must be able to contain within them
the minds of everyone else"
yo, you miss the point completely. the problem isnt that the
scientist must use all information about the external world, it is
that they must use their own info too, creating a loop of
consequences. imagine a machine that can tell you if you're going
to say "1" or "2". if you're a contrary fellow, if the machine
predicts 1 you're going to say 2, and vice versa. so there is no
answer the machine can give, it becomes a loop.
i should stop drinking
|11.3.07 @ 10:42AM|#
I agree with the iih declaration"
of this as the open/weekend political thread.
That said,
this sums up some misgiving that lovers of freedom
(libertarians?) have about the current administration. I usually
disagree (>50%) with Leonard Pitts, but find his pieces well
thought out and entertaining reading.
|11.3.07 @ 10:48AM|#
Hey didnt asimov write a 4th and 5th book too, where the
protagonist gets laid by big breasted women?
Foundation's Edge and Foundation and Earth.
Foundations edge was excellent. I waited literally decades for that
one. Incidentally, that novel was Dr. Asimov's first entry into the
NYT bestseller list.
|11.3.07 @ 10:51AM|#
...who's to deny Ike Asimov his place in history alongside
the other greats of the pulpopod era, like Ron Hubbard?
Russell, how do you manage to read with your head so far up your
ass? Just (sort of) kidding. ;-)
|11.3.07 @ 11:12AM|#
I wonder why the animosity by libertarians towards
NPR?
Partly the taxpayer funding, and partly the lefty elitism that
permeates their broadcasts.
|11.3.07 @ 11:38AM|#
R C Dean,
Also, left-leanings aside, NPR is heavily Beltway-centric in its
viewpoints. Naturally.
I'm a big fan of Asimov. He was no libertarian, but my fondness for
literature doesn't require ideological purity.
For myself, I've joined both the Second Foundation and the Bene
Gesserit. You know, to cover all my bases.
iih|11.3.07 @ 11:42AM|#
Trey:
ihh, perhaps you can confirm this, I understand that "The
Foundation" was translated in Arabic as "Al Qaeda."
"Al Qaeda" literally means "the base" and could also be "the
foundation".
|11.3.07 @ 11:49AM|#
My favorite Isaac Asimov piece was a short story titled The Last Question. I was shocked to find it, in it's entirety, on the tubes, but here it is. If you haven't read it, you should.
iih|11.3.07 @ 11:55AM|#
I agree with the iih declaration" of this as the
open/weekend political thread.
At some point last night I actually hesitated weather it is the
weekend already. It seems that I now know thait is weekend when the
H&R's weekend thread appears on the blog.
|11.3.07 @ 12:01PM|#
iih,
Me too. It has been widely mentioned in the news this organization
with an Arabic name meaning "The base"
Osama bin Laden explained the origin of the term in a
videotaped interview with al Jazeera journalist Tayseer Alouni in
October 2001:
The name 'al-Qaeda' was established a long time ago by mere chance.
The late Abu Ebeida El-Banashiri established the training camps for
our mujahedeen against Russia's terrorism. We used to call the
training camp al-Qaeda. The name stayed.
From Wiki
iih|11.3.07 @ 12:01PM|#
R C Dean:
Partly the taxpayer funding
Come on, compared to where and much else of our taxes go, I am
willing to forgive them. I am a fan of many of their programs
(especially Wait, Wait, Don't Tell Me (especially that
they host O'Rourke and one of my most favorite comedians Paula
Poundstone. Car Talk is great too.
and partly the lefty elitism that permeates their
broadcasts.
But if it were not for NPR, we'll be left with the Limbaughs and
the Savages of the airwaves.
|11.3.07 @ 12:17PM|#
From the post:
social scientists who can accurately pinpoint laws of mass
social behavior
Imagine an economist being inspired by this...imagine.
If you use your understanding of the laws of human behavior to
advocate policies that move society closer to a "Free Market," are
you predicting and manipulating?
As soon as you use scientific understanding as a basis for your
policy, you are engaged in the project described...libertarian or
communist or green or democrat.
|11.3.07 @ 12:33PM|#
In the foundation novels, psychohistory is described so that the aggregate behaviour of humanity can be predicted. Just as individual molecules in a gas are unpredictable, so are individual reactions of humans. However, like gas molecules, when you get enough of them together, laws of prediction can be formed, akin to weather forecasting. Fanciful stuff, but in the realm of SF, it's not that outrageous of an premise.
|11.3.07 @ 12:51PM|#
Come on, compared to where and much else of our taxes go, I
am willing to forgive them.
I agree that of all that the government spends, CPB/PBS/NPR should
be near the botton of the let's kill it list. Nonetheless,
at the risk of sounding condesending, Yes, it's only a drop in the
bucket. But the bucket is full of drops and spoonfuls. Actually,
the bucket is overflowing from all of the drops and spoonfuls. We
call that the deficit. PBS/NPR is a luxury that the government
should not be providing. I like to go bowling, but I don't want the
taxpayers to help pay for it.
IMHO, PBS and NPR are big boys now. All grown up and able to fend
for themselves. Kick 'em out of the nest.
iih|11.3.07 @ 12:59PM|#
J sub D:
Com'on, don't you ever listen to Michigan Radio?
IMHO, PBS and NPR are big boys now. All grown up and able to
fend for themselves. Kick 'em out of the nest.
I agree. But if it is membership/subscription-based, how are we
going to stop those who listen in but don't pay from listening?
Can't we think of those 13% of the budget as an allowance on those
in the public who listen in but do not pay?
Elemenope|11.3.07 @ 1:00PM|#
Damn it, J sub D, you beat me to my point. And even on the
scales we deal with, its not all that fanciful; most foreign
relations are predicated upon the mostly correct fact that even
though governments are composed of large numbers of individuals, in
the aggregate a government's actions vis a vis an event are
decently easy to predict.
It is in fact remarkable just how many systems have indeterminately
active parts that give basically determinate aggregate behaviors.
Why should we believe that, in the odd but optimistic future where
human civilization spans an entire galaxy, that the structures at
that scale wouldn't be very predictable?
|11.3.07 @ 1:05PM|#
ok, here's a question. I'm a libertarian, but I also really enjoy national parks and the like. If we take into account that ownership comes from transforming the land or by mixing your labor with it, could a park like that really ever be opened privately?
|11.3.07 @ 1:07PM|#
Com'on, don't you ever listen to Michigan Radio?
All the time. It's on the home and car presets. I've got my
principles though. Confession here, when I was in the Navy I bowled
at a lot of government supported facilities. The lane fees and the
drinks cost consirably less there.
|11.3.07 @ 1:13PM|#
I'm a libertarian, but I also really enjoy national parks
and the like. If we take into account that ownership comes from
transforming the land or by mixing your labor with it, could a park
like that really ever be opened privately?
Probably not. If they existed, they'd be playgrounds for the rich.
DDS, you (and me) are what is often described as a small l
libertarian. It makes us somewhat hypocritical but likely more
realistic about the nature of man.
If you always agree with the party line, you're not thinking for
yourself.
highnumber|11.3.07 @ 1:17PM|#
Foundation inspired Naked Raygun's "The Mule,"
then?
(In a spiralling humanity
There's a cycle we can see
In a throng's monstrosity odds are
There'll always be a mule
You never can predict the mind of a lunatic
A mind so badly sick
With strange arithmetic)
I never knew. Asimov bored me.
iih|11.3.07 @ 1:22PM|#
ok, here's a question. I'm a libertarian, but I also really
enjoy national parks and the like. If we take into account that
ownership comes from transforming the land or by mixing your labor
with it, could a park like that really ever be opened
privately?
Up in Quebec, they are thinking of privatizing some provincial
parks. The one I am aware of (and have been to) is Mt. Orford. For more
detail, see this, for example.
|11.3.07 @ 1:26PM|#
Foundation inspired Naked Raygun's "The Mule," then?
(In a spiralling humanity
There's a cycle we can see
In a throng's monstrosity odds are
There'll always be a mule
You never can predict the mind of a lunatic
A mind so badly sick
With strange arithmetic)
Sure sounds like it.
I never knew. Asimov bored me.
I learn useful stuff and useless crap here all the time.
|11.3.07 @ 1:33PM|#
Up in Quebec, they are thinking of privatizing some
provincial parks. The one I am aware of (and have been to) is Mt.
Orford. For more detail, see this, for example.
Interesting on many levels. I've got to agree with "I always
said that I would not change my mind on the importance for us not
to find ourselves in a situation where we are managing a ski centre
and a golf club," said Béchard. "We don't want to do that. And we
haven't changed our mind on that."
IIRC, Canada has the highest percentage of land locked up in state
and national parks. Maybe they should sell some. Or maybe save it
for a rainy day. Land is like money in the bank.
iih|11.3.07 @ 1:33PM|#
I tried to read one of his novels, but was bored to death. But I am not big on SF, except rarely. I remember liking Aldous HUxley's Brave New World. Daniel Quinn's Ismael is certainly not SF, but is one of the best books I ever read. Anyone here read Ishmael?
|11.3.07 @ 1:34PM|#
Make that "provincial and national parks". It's that damned ugly american syndrome kicking in.
iih|11.3.07 @ 1:43PM|#
J sub D:
tsk tsk Canada does not have state parks ;-)
In Canada, I do not think that it is some sort of fetish for
government/public ownership of parks. They simply have so much land
to even care. (For those who may not know, Canada has the second
largest country in the world.)
|11.3.07 @ 2:36PM|#
Parks could still exist in a purely libertarian world, and I
don't think they'd be "playgrounds for the rich".
How? Non-profits. Put the Boy Scouts in charge of Yellowstone. Put
the Sierra Club in charge of Alaska's parks. I would donate money
to these causes if I knew that without them these places wouldn't
exist. (Especially if my taxes weren't as high.) Of course, you
couldn't do this overnight, but things like this are already
happening. Hunting groups are buying up land to create game
reserves. The outdoors sports industry is huge in this country.
rho|11.3.07 @ 2:41PM|#
Asimov's Foundation was written during a time when
everybody thought SCIENCE would give us
everything. Flying cars. Moon trips. Commuter submarines.
Professional psychology was moving out of injecting mercury
directly into the brains of spastics phase and into the talky-talk
my-wife-left-me mainstream phase. Not such a crazy idea to imagine
psychohistory, then.
I liked the Foundation trilogy, poorly named such since it
was actually written as a bunch of short story serials. His
post-serial books, F. Edge and F. Earth were
monumental works of crap. Asimov never wrote very good long-form
fiction, IMO.
However, as somebody noted, books four and five did include the
great science fiction staple--the Awkwardly Written Gratuitous Sex
Scene. This, I believe, makes them classics.
|11.3.07 @ 2:45PM|#
Speaking of attempts at control
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan - Gen. Pervez Musharraf declared a state of
emergency in Pakistan on Saturday, suspending the constitution,
replacing the chief justice before a crucial Supreme Court ruling
on his future as president, and cutting communications in the
capital.
Off the wire a little while ago.
|11.3.07 @ 2:48PM|#
F. Edge and F. Earth were monumental works of crap. I liked Foundations Edge. Foundation and Earth tried to do way too much, thus doing nothing well.
|11.3.07 @ 2:49PM|#
In Venezuela, a much different tact is unfolding...
CARACAS (Reuters) - Congress passed President Hugo Chavez's
proposal to scrap presidential term limits on Friday in a package
of constitutional changes that Venezuelans are likely to approve in
a referendum next month.
Pro-Chavez lawmakers, who dominate the legislature, shouted "yes,
yes," and chanted the president's political slogan "Fatherland,
socialism or death" in approving the measures.
I will note that Chavez is using democratic mechanisms in an
attempt to achieve the same ends that Musharaff uses
military/police force to achieve.
Matt|11.3.07 @ 2:49PM|#
"But if it is membership/subscription-based, how are we going to
stop those who listen in but don't pay from listening? "
I think the viable solution is adopting the business model of, say,
Digitally Imported Radio (di.fm, I think currently the biggest
for-profit Internet radio, having several thousands of
listeners).
If you're a member you've got access to the premium services
(higher bitrate quality, the replay channel, etc.), while all the
others can still listen at up to 96 kbps for free.
Support also comes from the commercials, which isn't unusual for
the radio - the alternative being the underwriting spot, which is
already widespread in public broadcasting (used e.g. by the PBS) -
in such a case, the audience becomes an "asset", rather than a
burden - even if not paying directly, the listeners "provide" the
financing for the station (through the income generated by the
sponsorship, positively related to the listenership).
Hence, I don't really see a problem.
|11.3.07 @ 2:57PM|#
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan - Gen. Pervez Musharraf declared a state
of emergency in Pakistan on Saturday, suspending the constitution,
replacing the chief justice before a crucial Supreme Court ruling
on his future as president, and cutting communications in the
capital.
Yeah, I saw that. The sad part is, I wasn't a bit surprised.
Pakistan goes into and out of martial law, like a 6 year old boy
and the back door. I've said it before, some cultures/societies are
not prepared for responsible, democratic, self government.
|11.3.07 @ 2:59PM|#
What keeps prices from going too high? The market. What
keeps goods on the shelves to buy? The market. What keeps causing
the creation of better products for people to buy? The
market
Apropos of nothing in particular, when I read this, the tune of the
Simpson's Monorail song immediately got into my head.
ed|11.3.07 @ 2:59PM|#
It's over 25 years since I first (and last) read Foundation but sheesh, it was just a novel, or rather three novels, and sci-fi ones at that. Given this fact Asimov created a serviceable framework for enjoyable, not-too-taxing, light reading. Few sci-fi endeavors get beyond that. I remember liking it despite the fact I was forced to read it. And yes, I remember The Mule freaking me out at the time, so I guess Asimov was successful with that plot device. I admit I haven't thought about it since...I'm considering rereading the original Dune trilogy...but enough about me.
|11.3.07 @ 3:05PM|#
On Venezuela, I posted this 3 days ago.
joe, I'll bet that the proposed cahanes are adopted with minor,
window dressing changes. I'll also bet that Chavez will die in
office, be executed/imprisoned by a military coup or live out his
days in exile. IOW, he will never relinquish power honorably.
Please save these predictions so you can throw them in my face when
I'm proven wrong by events.
Hoping that you get to do that,
J sub D
1 for 1 so far. Shit.
|11.3.07 @ 3:10PM|#
I will note that Chavez is using democratic mechanisms in an
attempt to achieve the same ends that Musharaff uses
military/police force to achieve.
My last prediction of the week - Chavez will be in power
longer.
|11.3.07 @ 3:16PM|#
Can't we think of those 13% of the budget as an allowance on
those in the public who listen in but do not pay?
But what about those of us in the public who neither pay nor
listen? Why should I be required to pay a cent for a forum I find
tedious and occasionally offensive?
|11.3.07 @ 3:22PM|#
Since NPR was mentioned (I know this is off topic, but where
is my weekend thread?), I wonder wy the animosity by libertarians
towards NPR? Is it because of the 13% of their revenue that comes
from the Federal government? This always bewildered me.
iih -- Libertarians object to the Public in National Public Radio.
Oh, and the natural fallout from the financing source, since public
broadcasting, whether radio or TV, is almost invariably run by
hardcore statists who can spend lots of money on agitprop hardly
anyone tunes into. If you're not directly accountable to viewers
for your revenue, your programming will reflect that lack of need
to be responsive -- but will reflect your need to please those in
government who hold the pursestrings.
And if you think taxation is theft, spending the loot on this stuff
is especially galling.
iih|11.3.07 @ 3:32PM|#
J sub D:
I've said it before, some cultures/societies are not prepared
for responsible, democratic, self government.
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|11.3.07 @ 3:34PM|#
There is more at stake here than the credibility of a
president or a presidency. What is at stake is the ability of
people to trust that those in positions of trust are worthy of
trust. To play fast and loose with facts, as the Bush
administration has habitually done, is to put truth itself into
play and risk rendering government's word worthless. Not this
government, but government, period.
If it takes the misdoings of the Bush administration to make even
folks like Leonard Pitt distrust all government all the time, then
perhaps, in a twisted way, the unintended consequence of their
behavior could be viewed as laudable.
The problem, of course, is that Leonard Pitt thinks it's a bad
thing for people to distrust government, and also thinks HRC will
restore truthfulness and trust in government again.
iih|11.3.07 @ 3:37PM|#
prolefeed:
I am really curious, can you give me an example of a hardcore
statist on NPR?
I have been listening to NPR consistently and, last time I checked,
it was the conservatives, the WH, the neocons, and the Envagelicals
who were made at NPR. They haven't caved in because of the
opposition of those in power, have they? Remember the extreme
pressure they were put under by the government because they were
not conservative enough?
I would be for stripping public funding for NPR/PBS and put PBS on
a subscription-based TV channel. But what about NPR? What about
those who will listen in but not pay? May be through digital and
satellite radio?
iih|11.3.07 @ 3:39PM|#
BTW, I just discovered that Helen Thomas is of Arab descent. Her parents were Lebanese American.
|11.3.07 @ 3:48PM|#
IMHO, PBS and NPR are big boys now. All grown up and able to
fend for themselves. Kick 'em out of the nest.
I agree. But if it is membership/subscription-based, how are we
going to stop those who listen in but don't pay from listening?
Can't we think of those 13% of the budget as an allowance on those
in the public who listen in but do not pay?
To follow this logic further:
But if private radio has people who don't respond to the ads,
shouldn't the government kick in money to make up for those free
riders?
But if private TV has people who fast forward through the
commercials ...
It takes a statist worldview to say that since some will not
voluntarily pay, or pay enough, for a public "good", we need to
force everyone to pay for it, and imprison those who dissent and
refuse to pay.
Goldthwait|11.3.07 @ 3:52PM|#
Rolling Stone considers Paul Krugman a "big thinker"? No wonder that magazine is so incredibly lame. They should stick to music journalism.
Matt|11.3.07 @ 3:52PM|#
ilh: "What about those who will listen in but not pay?" - I have already answered to that - check my comment at 2:49pm.
highnumber|11.3.07 @ 3:52PM|#
I give money to NPR with the hope that I may be replacing some
gov't funding with my $$.
Some of their programming is indispensable. Some of it is horribly
biased toward liberal pro-state. (I'm looking at you, local public
affairs program 848!) Some of it is decent unbiased reporting. Some
of it is boring, boring boring. Some of it is good fun. Overall,
it's the best radio I get. I refrain from bashing it.
iih|11.3.07 @ 3:55PM|#
But if private radio has people who don't respond to the ads,
shouldn't the government kick in money to make up for those free
riders?
Your point is well taken. But, not everyone who listens to an ad is
obliged to buy.
In any case, I think that with digital radio technology (if I
understand it right), this is issue is resolved. Only those who
wish to listen will pay for it. No taxes.
iih|11.3.07 @ 3:57PM|#
Matt-- I missed your comment. Thanks. Is there digital radio available in the US (i.e., in my car, can I get it?).
iih|11.3.07 @ 3:58PM|#
highnumber (and others who wish to share):
Just out of curiosity, which NPR programs do you like?
|11.3.07 @ 4:00PM|#
Overall, it's the best radio I get. I refrain from bashing
it.
It's in my listening mix as well. I just don't think that Britanny
Spears should have to contribute for it. I used Ms. Spears for an
example because she's rich and likely doesn't listen. Plus she's
contemptible. Mitch the plumber might be more sympathetic, but
y'all don't know Mitch.
|11.3.07 @ 4:03PM|#
iih -- I don't ever intentionally listen to NPR. I've heard
brief scraps while doing the "scan" function on my car radio, and
never heard anything worth listening to. So perhaps I was mistaken
in lumping NPR in with PBS, since I haven't spent significant time
listening to what they broadcast. Mea culpa.
I do have direct experience with the folks at PBS, though. I ended
up talking with the folks at the local station because I was
running for office, and they were airing debates between the people
contending for office, and I took advantage of the "free" publicity
(yeah, yeah, and I drive on public roads, too -- I still want to
privatize them). Everyone I talked to who worked at the station was
a hardcore statist cheerleader for much bigger government. Had an
interesting off-air conversation with the (since deceased)
moderator of our debate (who wasn't the least bit moderate) about
how I wanted to cut off all government funding for their station.
He was a very pleasant guy, if you could keep him off the topic of
politics.
|11.3.07 @ 4:11PM|#
Your point is well taken. But, not everyone who listens to
an ad is obliged to buy.
iih -- Of course they aren't obligated. Nor should anyone be
obligated to pay through taxes for NPR or PBS. The people who like
what NPR or PBS puts out, and are altruistic enough to voluntarily
support it, can chip in enough to keep it afloat without government
coercion.
I don't subscribe to the paper copy of Reason (yet), and haven't
bought anything from the ads they run here. Call me a curmudgeon.
Is this a problem? Should the government kick in funding to make up
for free riders like me? Or -- gasp -- has modern economics solved
the problem of privately funding public goods? (Hint -- yes.)
iih|11.3.07 @ 4:12PM|#
prolefeed:
I rarely watch PBS. But NPR in the morning and the evening commute
is essential. The alternative is the big fascist "best and
brightest" (read "awful and dumbest") 96.9 (google Michael Graham
and Jay Severin).
I recommend listening to them in the morning or just "All things
Considered". In weekends, "Wait Wait Don't Tell" is the funniest
program ever. I think you will change your mind about them, though
that doesn't mean you have to change your opinion regarding the tax
thing. I am with you on that.
As highnumber mentioned, some of their stuff is boring, some is a
lot of fun, and some is really very very information.
I personally like Diane Rheme, On Point, and
Talk of The Nation. Also, Car Talk and Wait
Wait Don't Tell on weekends.
prolefeed: Give it a shot... I won't tell anyone that you
did.
I wonder, would Walter Block (hardcore Libertarian Misesian
economist) listen to NPR. Ron Paul does not shy away from being
interviewed by NPR/PBS.
iih|11.3.07 @ 4:14PM|#
prolefeed @ 4:11pm: As I mention above, we are in agreement on the taxes thing.
iih|11.3.07 @ 4:15PM|#
Fix: Wait Wait Don't Tell ME
prolefeed: You can also stream them (for free!) on your computer.
Give it a shot.
|11.3.07 @ 4:33PM|#
Ron Paul does not shy away from being interviewed by
NPR/PBS.
Politics results in some twisted outcomes. After the election
(which I lost, getting 46% of the vote), the local PBS station
aired a discussion between the aforementioned immoderate moderator
and two people who had done much better than anyone had expected:
me (the ostensible Republican who is a libertarian); and a likeable
guy who'd run as an ostensible Democrat (though he was more of a
socialist) in a thoroughly Republican district and got about 45%
too.
Turns out that I had taken public financing, despite wanting to
entirely eliminate it, while the Democrat had refused public
financing, and enthusiastically supported the concept. When he
accused me of being a hypocrite for taking the public money, I
pointed out that it had been in my personal interest to take the
money, and so as a rational economic actor had done so, but since I
felt it was not in the interest of the general public to finance
these elections, I would have vigorously tried to eliminate public
funding once in office. Whereas the Democrat turned down the
funding because it would have limited the amount he could spend in
his campaign, but because he thought government was a positive
force for good, supported this and practically anything else
financed by taxes.
So, am I required to turn in my Libertarian Secret Decoder Ring for
using PBS and for taking public funds in an attempt to get in
office and try to eliminate both of these government-funded
programs?
|11.3.07 @ 4:40PM|#
So, am I required to turn in my Libertarian Secret Decoder
Ring for using PBS and for taking public funds in an attempt to get
in office and try to eliminate both of these government-funded
programs?
No. But you will be watched verry closely! ;-|
iih|11.3.07 @ 4:46PM|#
So, am I required to turn in my Libertarian Secret Decoder
Ring for using PBS and for taking public funds in an attempt to get
in office and try to eliminate both of these government-funded
programs?
Certainly not. And I think that what you did was perfectly
legitimate. As did Paul.
Matt|11.3.07 @ 4:57PM|#
ilh: sure, and yes, you can get it in a car :-)
Here's some more information:
"Digital Audio Radio Service or DARS refers to any type of digital
radio service. In the United States it is the official FCC term for
digital radio services.
The most popular type of DARS in the U.S. is SDARS: Satellite
Digital Audio Radio Service, operated by XM Radio and Sirius. XM
and Sirius both operate in the 2.3-GHz S band, from 2320 to 2345
MHz.
Outside the United States, WorldSpace operates a DARS network with
a footprint covering Europe, Asia, the Middle East and Africa using
the L-band."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SDARS
"XM Satellite Radio Holdings (XM) is one of two satellite radio
(SDARS) services in the United States and Canada, along with Sirius
Satellite Radio.
These two former rivals have announced their intention to merge,
which would create a single satellite radio entity in the United
States with nearly 14 million subscribers."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XM_Satellite_Radio
One ways to listen to the Digitally Imported Radio in a car (other
than just a laptop w/ wireless connection):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_radio_device
Other interesting alternatives:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_television_radio
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Multimedia_Broadcasting
iih|11.3.07 @ 5:01PM|#
Matt:
Oh, well, I do have satellite radio (Sirius). I thought that
digital radio is some sort of separate radio technology. NPR on
Sirius is bad, btw, because I do not think they expect too many
Sirius subscribers would be interested in NPR.
Matt|11.3.07 @ 5:09PM|#
iih: "digital radio" is a broad term which covers many technologies - DARS (one of examples of which is SDARS - specific applications of which are XM and Sirius), DTR (digital television radio), DMB (digital multimedia broadcasting), and, last but not least, Internet Radio (one of the examples of technologies used here is Icecast or Shoutcast - one of the specific applications of the latest being the Digitally Imported Radio). There's really a whole lot of alternatives to the older technologies :-)
Fluffy|11.3.07 @ 5:14PM|#
I think that humanities spending of all kinds is some of the
most unjust spending out there, despite the fact that a mere
pittance is spent on them, and despite the fact that I listen to
NPR and VPR and patronize museums that get public grants,
etc.
NPR takes my tax money and uses it to teach people that my
political views are despicable. I'd almost rather have a state
church supported by tax dollars. That would be offensive, but would
have little practical impact on my life, compared to an entity that
influences political and cultural debate.
And speaking of culture, I also find it offensive that there's this
great, big Tammany Hall of culture out there, floating on state
money and grant money and allowing a huge gaggle of crunchy
deadbeats to pat each other on the back and assert each other's
mutual cultural relevance. I would be delighted to see that crash
to the ground and have all of those sensitive types working the
drive-thru at McDonald's instead.
iih|11.3.07 @ 5:15PM|#
Matt:
Thanks. That is very informative. So, I guess there are
alternatives for NPR, and technology seems not to be the problem.
Changing peoples' views on the issue is certainly more difficult to
do.
|11.3.07 @ 5:37PM|#
In the long-term, a democratic Pakistan can only be a good thing. In the short term, a NUCLEAR democratic Pakistan is way bad for us.
|11.3.07 @ 5:42PM|#
Re: NPR
I hate it because the light jazz intros and segues. I hate light
jazz. That and the knowingly ironic tone that is really
condescension.
|11.3.07 @ 5:43PM|#
Pakistan and Bangladesh should have never been separated form India in the first place. Another British fuck-up (along with Northern Ireland, Iraq, Palestine, half of Africa, etc, etc, etc).
|11.3.07 @ 5:54PM|#
Re: How could NPR and PBS exist without govt funding...
Maybe they should outsource to Myanmar their shitty tote bag
production -- you know, the ones that VIEWERS LIKE YOU get when
they pledge $50?
iih|11.3.07 @ 5:58PM|#
SugarFree:
I think, depending on where you are, and how popular NPR is there
determine the programing. If you are in a city or in a "liberal"
college town, chances are less music will be played. In the midwest
(outside urban areas), chances are it is going to play a lot of
music, instead of more expensive, high demand programing.
iih|11.3.07 @ 6:00PM|#
Pakistan and Bangladesh should have never been separated
form India in the first place. Another British fuck-up (along with
Northern Ireland, Iraq, Palestine, half of Africa, etc, etc,
etc).
.. and oppressed the Americans more than 200 years ago? Funny how
things work out, UK and US are very good friends now.
|11.3.07 @ 6:03PM|#
iih,
The US military had contingency plans in place for a global war
against the UK until 1930. There was nothing inevitable about our
"special relationship".
|11.3.07 @ 6:06PM|#
We didn't have any special love for the UK until WWII as crimethink pointed out, and theres no history of bloodthirsty religious hatred between the US and UK. We also don't share a border directly, which helps.
iih|11.3.07 @ 6:08PM|#
Even funnier, France, America's greatest ally during the revolution, is now almost always discussed with a lot of negativity, especially on the Right.
|11.3.07 @ 6:09PM|#
Actually, now that I think about it, the US and Canada would be a more apt comparison. Though, again, we don't have the religious animosity going, and North America has far fewer people and far more resources than the Subcontinent does.
iih|11.3.07 @ 6:16PM|#
Question to those of you who are American history savvy: Can we say that today's neocons are the descendants and the evolved version of Hamilton, who believed that freedom can only be given by government as opposed as a natural right? I don't know much about Hamilton and would like to learn. I guess, and wiki it too, but this is more fun.
|11.3.07 @ 6:17PM|#
Actually, now that I think about it, the US and Canada would
be a more apt comparison. Though, again, we don't have the
religious animosity going, and North America has far fewer people
and far more resources than the Subcontinent does.
And the fact that we choose our own borders rather than having them
drawn for us arbitrarily by an outside power.
|11.3.07 @ 6:20PM|#
Maybe Rudy Giuliani can get on the ten dollar bill someday.
Though it would be more appropriate for him to be on the three
dollar bill... ;-)
Speaking
of which...
|11.3.07 @ 6:21PM|#
"How? Non-profits. Put the Boy Scouts in charge of Yellowstone.
Put the Sierra Club in charge of Alaska's parks. I would donate
money to these causes if I knew that without them these places
wouldn't exist. (Especially if my taxes weren't as high.) Of
course, you couldn't do this overnight, but things like this are
already happening. Hunting groups are buying up land to create game
reserves. The outdoors sports industry is huge in this
country."
Yogi, I agree with you about private donations. what my concern is
is with rightful ownership of the land in the first place. If I
plant a bunch of corn and take time to help it grow, then it would
be mine due to the "mixing of my labor". but you can't build a
fence around 1000 acres of land and say everything inside it is
yours.
|11.3.07 @ 6:22PM|#
Pakistan and Bangladesh should have never been separated
form India in the first place. Another British fuck-up
I'm not so sure of that. Even 20/20 hindsight doesn't answer the
what if? questions. Now that they've given up that
socialist crap, India seems to be making serious progress. Would
they be better off still yoked to Pakistan? Your guess is as good
as mine.
I will say this. In the late '70s I spent a week anchored off
Karachi. An alleged "liberty port", I had 5 of 6 days off. I took
the boat to shore the first day in. Spent two hours in beautiful
downtown Karachi, took the boat back to the ship, scrubbed myself
down vigorously, and didn't go ashore again. I've visited a lot of
places in my life, some good, some bad. Karachi, Pakistan was the
WORST place I've ever seen. There is competition
for the second worst, but Karachi, Pakistan stands alone. IMHO,
India is better off without Pakistan.
|11.3.07 @ 6:23PM|#
I'm not so sure of that. Even 20/20 hindsight doesn't answer
the what if? questions. Now that they've given up that socialist
crap, India seems to be making serious progress. Would they be
better off still yoked to Pakistan? Your guess is as good as
mine.
I think India would have had a moderating influence on Pakistan.
And there wouldn't be a constant threat of nuclear war. Muslims in
India--whether as residents, or immigrants--continually fare better
in just about every category than Muslims in Pakistan or
Bangladesh.
|11.3.07 @ 6:26PM|#
iih--
Its hard to compare the politics of the 1790s today. Really, both
major parties are partly Hamiltonian and partly Jeffersonian. The
Republicans are Hamiltonian in that they believe in rule by an
elite, and the Democrats are in that they believe in a large
government.
They are also both, in a way (at least in rhetoric) Jeffersonian.
They Republicans say they want small government, the Democrats say
they are for the little guy.
iih|11.3.07 @ 6:26PM|#
I thought "Pakistan" left. They wanted to create a "Muslim homeland" for India's Muslims. Some failed (Gujarat) and are still suffering in India. I personally believe that those Pakistani intellectuals who advocated independence were wrong. Things would have probably been better for all if they stayed with India.
|11.3.07 @ 6:27PM|#
Isn't it strange that Muslims tend to do much better in countries that don't have Muslim majorities?
Paul|11.3.07 @ 6:29PM|#
Can't we think of those 13% of the budget as an allowance on
those in the public who listen in but do not pay?
You have got to be fucking kidding me. I listen to all manner of
commercial radio stations and don't pay a dime, so now you're
telling me that I'm getting a "free ride"? Prying my tax dollars
from me at gunpoint because I listen to NPR but don't pay is
precisely why I don't give them one red cent.
"Oh, but NPR doesn't take advertising dollars."
Well, sounds like they need to work on their revenue model.
|11.3.07 @ 6:30PM|#
Isn't it strange that Muslims tend to do much better in
countries that don't have Muslim majorities?
Its not always true, I don't think they do too well in Europe.
|11.3.07 @ 6:30PM|#
Cesar,
Republican politicians are Aaron Burr, and Democrat politicians are
Benedict Arnold. The whole lot is full of traitors, thru and
thru.*
* Ron Paul doesn't count because he's a statesman, not a
politician. ;-)
iih|11.3.07 @ 6:35PM|#
I find it very weird that a founding father would actually believe that liberty comes, not from God/birth right, but is given by government (implying that government can take it back freely). May be I made the link between today's neocons and Hamilton because Hamilton was discussed in the context of Civil Liberties in Wartime in an Andrew Napolitano talk (I actually liked that guy a lot after hearing his talk -- see link).
|11.3.07 @ 6:35PM|#
Republican politicians are Aaron Burr, and Democrat
politicians are Benedict Arnold. The whole lot is full of traitors,
thru and thru.*
Speaking of Aaron Burr and the politics of the 1790s, its too bad
Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney couldn't have a duel today. That'd be
fun to watch, and any outcome would be good.
iih|11.3.07 @ 6:40PM|#
Isn't it strange that Muslims tend to do much better in
countries that don't have Muslim majorities?
Assuming that that is a serious question, they have done well in
the US and Canada, which goes to prove your point. In other
countries they do both good and bad (e.g., England, Germany,
Scandinavia -- we only hear about the trouble makers there). They
have had a lot of hard time in India, though they are a minority.
In some other countries where they have been a majority, they did
well (e.g., Malaysia).
|11.3.07 @ 6:41PM|#
Speaking of Aaron Burr and the politics of the 1790s, its
too bad Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney couldn't have a duel today.
That'd be fun to watch, and any outcome would be good.
They could both miss. :-(
iih|11.3.07 @ 6:41PM|#
"Oh, but NPR doesn't take advertising dollars."
Well, sounds like they need to work on their revenue
model.
Paul, see the ensuing discussion above. But they do actually get ad
money, as mentioned above.
iih|11.3.07 @ 6:55PM|#
They could both miss. :-(
And their incompetence at everything may very well give us that
result.
|11.3.07 @ 7:04PM|#
I think NPR is a classic example of a government program that
works. I, and most people, get far more out of NPR than they pay
into. The same can be said, in my opinion, about libraries.
I think an informed citizenry is as important as having police as
far as protecting our rights and the Republic. NPR and libraries
have demonstrated the virtues of an occupational culture of
professionalism as they have strived to be independent of their
funding, which is exactly what is needed if we want to get any
press and info critical of economic power centers...
Don't get me wrong, many governmnet programs don't "work" in that
they are wasteful and downright contrary to our rights and well
being. But even Mises thought many functions simply could not be
privatized, and I submit that amazingly poor intellectual quality
of private radio demonstrates that point...
|11.3.07 @ 7:05PM|#
prolefeed-
Wow, small world. I used to live in your district on Hui Iwa
St.(but couldn't vote because I still claimed VA residency). You're
right about the level of spending; I can remember Clayton Hee's
name of the top of my head even now because of the number of
commercials, but couldn't remember yours until a google search
connected you with him.
|11.3.07 @ 7:05PM|#
Navy just broke their decades long losing streak to Notre Dame. As joe would say, ND's tears are SO YUMMY!
|11.3.07 @ 7:06PM|#
Paul, see the ensuing discussion above. But they do actually
get ad money, as mentioned above.
That really ticks me off. Not that they have advertyising, but it's
advertising like this.. [sedate background music, quiet soothing
voice]All Things Considered was funded, in part, by Archer
Daniels Midland An essential link in the agricultural economy, ADM
works with farmers, food companies and others to feed the
world.
Now how can that possibly compare with the surrealism offered by
{loud banjo music, screaming, possiblty unhinged announcer]
Come see Cal Worthington and his dog Spot, selling used
cars for E-Z CREDIT! NO MONEY DOWN! NO ONE IS TURNED AWAY! We
WILL put YOU in the car of you choice.
GAURANTEED!!!
I tell ya, I just ain't the same.
|11.3.07 @ 7:09PM|#
Take away philanthropy and I think you would get virtually no Magazines like Reason. I don't know for sure, but I imagine Reason could not do it on subscriptions alone. Remember about a year or two ago Reason had articles about whether corporate philanthropy was justified or not (the guy from Whole Foods was the foil). I submit that Libertarianism perhaps could not exist in a pure market (ironic, eh?). Anything, market or no, that keeps the marketplace of ideas (no pun intended) going is a-OK in my book...
|11.3.07 @ 7:10PM|#
Navy just broke their decades long losing streak to Notre
Dame. As joe would say, ND's tears are SO YUMMY!
I just orgasmed. Oh wait, here comes another...
iih|11.3.07 @ 7:12PM|#
MNG:
Re NPR: Ditto. Very well said. I am not a member since I pretend
that all my tax money goes to NPR and the war (this is how I make
myself feel better about the income tax).
Re ND: Then you're either a Michigan, MSU, or Ohio State fan if you
are so happy regarding ND.
J sub D: That's funny. I like the NPR ad better. Do you work for
NPR? How come you know the ad so well?
|11.3.07 @ 7:13PM|#
Take away philanthropy and I think you would get virtually
no Magazines like Reason.
Bingo. Stop right there. Write a check to NPR. Just do it.
iih|11.3.07 @ 7:17PM|#
Correction: I am not a member since I pretend that all my tax money goes to NPR and NOT the war
|11.3.07 @ 7:17PM|#
I do, every year J sub D. They deserve it. I imagine they don't
need much gov. money, but having a 10-20% foundation makes it
easier to take on controversial work and anger some big donor, and
to make sure that places like Fargo get service...
iih-You don't have to be a fan of one of those teams to hate on
Notre Dame. What other team gets an entire network contract TO
THEMSELVES? And their preferential treatment at Bowl selection time
is an affront to merit (and a look into the faults of the market by
the way, ND get's picked higher than they should because of their
fan following, not how good they are). Despite the fact that they
have sucked for years and years. I hope NBC is pulling in lots of
losses for that...
|11.3.07 @ 7:21PM|#
MNG So do I. I stopped when WDET dropped Car Talk a few years ago. When they brought it back, I started again. I wasn't alone in that. Like I said earlier, they're all grown up. Kick out of the nest.
|11.3.07 @ 7:22PM|#
Mr Nice Guy,
Philanthropy is entirely compatible with a free market (I don't
know what a "pure" market is), since it doesn't involve forcibly
extracting money from the person giving it. It sounds like the
libertarian in your head is getting lippy again.
iih|11.3.07 @ 7:23PM|#
J sub D: WDET, but not Michigan Radio? WDET plays a lot of music during the day, since they don't seem to do that well financially.
Kolohe|11.3.07 @ 7:27PM|#
Ron Paul doesn't count because he's a statesman
Congressman Paul died? I would have thought that would've made the
news. Damned media bias.
|11.3.07 @ 7:27PM|#
Reception realities. AA is 60 miles away. FM reception is unreliable to nonexistent at that range. If you'd like a lecture on RF propogation in different environments, I'm your man. Since it bores the crap out of everyone, just trust me on this.
iih|11.3.07 @ 7:31PM|#
J sub D: I remember getting the signal in Detroit, or may be not. Certainly at the airport.
|11.3.07 @ 7:35PM|#
iih, The airport's 25 west of downtown. Almost halfwat to Ann Arbor. It is also not surrounded by 10-50 story steel framed buildings. Trust me.
iih|11.3.07 @ 7:41PM|#
J sub D: OK, OK, already. Got it! Sheesh, I guess my MI years are already becoming too fuzzy.
|11.3.07 @ 8:43PM|#
By this time in a thread, when only the Peanut Gallery is
posting, the peanut shells are hip-deep.
Sloshing thru here....
But, has anybody ever heard of the ecommunist/economist by the name
of Rendigs Fels? (Reni to his friends.)
Curious.
|11.3.07 @ 8:43PM|#
Reception realities. AA is 60 miles away.
Actually, Ann Arbor is only 36 miles from the center of downtown
Detroit,
35.5 miles from WDET's transmitter (and 28 miles from WRIF's
transmitter). Shouldn't be too hard to pick up those stations in
AA.
|11.3.07 @ 8:47PM|#
JW-
On that note, I just finished reading Peter Hamliton's 2,000
page, 2-book Pandora's Star series. A bit pedantic at times, but a
very complelling story line and good cast of characters.
Shh!!!
...or you'll have the Marxist loonies here saying that
MorningLightMountain represents "capitalism" at it's 'purest'.
:o)
iih|11.3.07 @ 8:52PM|#
Actually, Ann Arbor is only 36 miles from the center of
downtown Detroit, 35.5 miles from WDET's transmitter (and 28 miles
from WRIF's transmitter). Shouldn't be too hard to pick up those
stations in AA.
Thank you Brian. J sub D really made me think that I am loosing my
memory. Grrrr, J sub D!!!
|11.3.07 @ 8:57PM|#
Shh!!!
...or you'll have the Marxist loonies here saying that
MorningLightMountain represents "capitalism" at it's 'purest'.
:o)
Oh, if we could only put up a quantum barrier around the Capitol
and the White House. If only....
Where's Ozzie when you need him?
Doctor Duck|11.3.07 @ 9:28PM|#
Actually, Ann Arbor is only ... 35.5 miles from WDET's
transmitter
The issue was getting WUOM's signal in Detroit, not getting WDET in
AA.
WUOM's xmtr is actually about 13 miles NW of AA, on Peach Mountain,
roughly 45 air miles from downtown Detroit (up Stinchfield Woods
Rd, by the Radio Astronomy site. Say hi!).
Its signal is good over most of metro Detroit, but in the concrete
canyons it can be a problem.
iih|11.3.07 @ 9:31PM|#
Good to see that the Ann Arborites are still good and healthy (and libertarian).
|11.4.07 @ 12:38AM|#
The US military had contingency plans in place for a global
war against the UK until 1930. There was nothing inevitable about
our "special relationship".
The US military probably still has top secret contingency plans
along those lines -- they have contingency plans for darn near
everything, from what I gathered from the tiny amount of
nonclassified stuff my late father (a career military officer)
could discuss with me.
|11.4.07 @ 12:49AM|#
Yogi, I agree with you about private donations. what my
concern is is with rightful ownership of the land in the first
place. If I plant a bunch of corn and take time to help it grow,
then it would be mine due to the "mixing of my labor". but you
can't build a fence around 1000 acres of land and say everything
inside it is yours.
The rightful ownership could arise from the various levels of
government auctioning off currently public land. Would it all stay
as parkland? Probably not, but for that to happen, one would have
to assume that the current system of public land ownership embodies
the "highest and best use" philosophy of land ownership, which it
clearly doesn't.
What we have right now is de facto ownership of vast amounts of
land by environmental groups and other special interests who didn't
pay anything for it, other than some rent-seeking political favor
currying. If you really want to put a dent in poverty, the burst of
wealth that would be created by selling off public lands and
retiring government debt and the taxes to service that debt would
help the poorest people in our society -- and everyone else.
|11.4.07 @ 1:03AM|#
I think NPR is a classic example of a government program
that works. I, and most people, get far more out of NPR than they
pay into. The same can be said, in my opinion, about
libraries.
Mr. Nice Guy -- The vast majority of Americans don't listen to NPR
at all, but pay for it, so clearly "most people" suffer from its
presence. You may argue that the consumer surplus from the few who
do listen far exceeds the amount of taxes extracted from the many,
but private businesses routinely generate consumer surpluses that
wildly exceed revenues.
Public libraries, which are much more widely used, almost certainly
generate a consumer surplus well in excess of the taxes extracted
-- but you seem to be assuming that PUBLIC libraries would be more
efficient and generate a greater consumer surplus than PRIVATE
libraries, which seems highly unlikely to anyone who has had the
misfortune to observe government programs at close range.
|11.4.07 @ 1:12AM|#
Wow, small world. I used to live in your district on Hui Iwa
St.(but couldn't vote because I still claimed VA residency). You're
right about the level of spending; I can remember Clayton Hee's
name of the top of my head even now because of the number of
commercials, but couldn't remember yours until a google search
connected you with him.
Kenny -- Were you home when I walked Hui Iwa street? Did we meet in
person?
Yeah, when you get outspent 4-1, and your opponent starts off with
huge name recognition and you start off with about 0.1%, it's tough
to close the gap, especially in a district leaning just enough
Democratic that the straight party-line voters put you down a
thousand votes from the get-go. Those AJA households in Kaneohe
were brutal -- got maybe 1 in 6 votes there.
|11.4.07 @ 4:36AM|#
If this was 2004, I don't think so. The only people I remember
ever coming to my door cold-calling were Mormons. Also, I was
working odd hours in Fall 2004, as well as being gone periodically
for days or weeks at a time off the island, so that is probably the
reason.
I always thought AJA's in HI trend the most republican of any
group, even more than whites. At least, that's what I remember
seeing when I saw ethnic breakdown of Lingle's last election.
But your right in that a right-libertarian is a tough sell in HI,
especially with the state's economic bases. I've never been to the
LP HQ's down there in Kaka'ako, so I don't know first hand, but my
impression they are mostly of the Hawaii's "Natural" High variety
(NTTAWTT)
Kenny|11.4.07 @ 4:44AM|#
Just to explain, the way I figured the connection was that you said you lived in windward a couple of threads ago, and that your opponent was pretty much a socialist. I had a hunch, so googled the name in your email address, and saw an old state primary election website and saw your name in the same race as Hee's. I hope that's not creeping you out.
|11.4.07 @ 10:09AM|#
Ok, I'm a racist and here's why today I feel more self righteous
than usual.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/11/03/torture.protest.ap/index.html
"Hate crimes are out of control in America," Malik Shabazz, a
legal adviser to Williams and her family and a founder of Black
Lawyers for Justice, told the group.
"Nooses are being hung and our women are being raped by white moms.
What happened to Megan Williams was a hate crime and we want this
prosecuted as a hate crime."
Now, what happened to that poor girl in the story above was a
terrible sickening crime. However, according to Pat Buchanan's
Death of the West on pages 68-69
-In 1987 when the crime was rape black criminals chose white
victims 28 percent of the time. White criminals chose black victims
0 percent of the time. The person conduction the study couldn't
find a single case where the criminal was white and victim
black.
-Blacks had committed 90 percent of interraial violent crimes in
1994.
And last but not least..
-Even in the "hate crime" category, in 1994 blacks were twice as
likely to be the assilant as the victim.
Where the fuck do blacks get off acting like they are the victims?
Who needs protecting?
And just remember, if you end up arguing with me you can just yell
"racist" and declare victory at any time.
|11.4.07 @ 10:36AM|#
Grand Chalupa, that can't be you. "Racist" is one of those fake PC-terms the real GC would never use!
Justice Dept|11.4.07 @ 12:07PM|#
A February 1997 report on rape and sexual-based crime published
by the United States Department of Justice stated that of the
crimes surveyed, 56% of arrestees were "White", 42% were "Black",
and 2% were of other races. The report additionally noted that
"[v]ictims of rape were about evenly divided between whites and
blacks; in about 88% of forcible rapes, the victim and offender
were of the same race."
Greenfeld, Lawrence A. (February 1997). Sex Offenses and Offenders:
An Analysis of Data on Rape and Sexual Assault. United States
Department of Justice.
Justice Dept|11.4.07 @ 12:13PM|#
A break down of the numbers.
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/tables/ovrelracetab.htm
|11.4.07 @ 12:15PM|#
Nothing on Fred Thompson's dope dealer yet?
I haven't heard anything about this. Do tell.
fbi|11.4.07 @ 12:29PM|#
for 2004
Anti-white victims 1,027 offenders 1,085
Anti-black victims 3,475 offenders 2,694
Source: Crime in the United States, 2004, FBI, Uniform Crime
Reports.
fbi|11.4.07 @ 12:35PM|#
Racial Bias
In 2005, law enforcement agencies reported that 4,691 hate crime
offenses were racially motivated. Of these offenses:
* 68.2 percent were triggered by anti-black bias.
* 19.9 percent were motivated by anti-white bias.
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/hc2005/incidentsoffenses.htm
fbi|11.4.07 @ 12:38PM|#
For 2005
An analysis of available race data for the 6,804 known hate crime
offenders revealed that:
* 60.5 percent were white.
* 19.9 percent were black.
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/hc2005/offenders.htm
|11.4.07 @ 12:40PM|#
Um, if a people make up 10% of the population but commit 40% of
the crime, they don't come out looking very good.
Absolute numbers mean nothing, do I really need to explain that to
you?
And by the own numbers black on white crime is still twice white on
black crime for 2004.
Of course a crime is a crime and I wouldn't care if each one was
treated equal regardless of race. The problem is the media
reporting patterns and the protest of black "leaders".
The only explanation that makes sense is elitist liberals and
blacks have a need to paint a picture of evil whites praying on
innocent, nobel blacks.
fbi|11.4.07 @ 12:42PM|#
2005 number of black offenders involved in a hate crime = 1,357
while number of victims = 3,322
Blacks were about 2.5 times as likely to be victim as offender.
|11.4.07 @ 12:46PM|#
An analysis of available race data for the 6,804 known hate
crime offenders revealed that:
* 60.5 percent were white.
* 19.9 percent were black.
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/hc2005/offenders.htm
Nice try, but blacks are also the overwhelming perpetrators of
"anti-black" hate crimes. How this makes sense, I have no
idea.
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/hc2005/table1.htm
Blacks according to my math commit 38% of race based hate crimes
and are 38% of the victimes.
No matter how you slice it, no detailed analysis of crime rates can
make American blacks look good.
|11.4.07 @ 12:51PM|#
Oops, I read that data wrong.
Ok, looks like I'll have to give you "hate crimes" but they're
still a very small percentage of overall crime. Also, a lot of what
counts as a hate crime is subjective anyway. There was this story
of these two white kids getting raped and tortured to death by five
or six blacks. The blacks weren't charged with a hate crime because
there is no white Jesse Jackson.
The only reason hate crimes get the overwhelming attention is
because in the liberal lexicon being a "racist" is much more evil
than just being a regular old rapist or murder.
Duke & Duke for one dollar|11.4.07 @ 12:56PM|#
Exhibit A: Billy Ray Valentine
Ehxibit B: Louis Winthorp III
no role of socioeconomics on crime?
fbi|11.4.07 @ 12:59PM|#
Absolute numbers mean nothing
Not strictly true. Absolute numbers must be interpreted according
to the meaning they do provide.
The bigger question is what meaning do you assign to the
information you present?
The only explanation that makes sense is elitist liberals and
blacks have a need to paint a picture of evil whites praying on
innocent, nobel blacks.
No one has presented a case that we have seen alleging that whites
are typically evil, but the fact that blacks are 2.5 times as
likely to be a victim as an offender in interracial hate crime, the
fact that 70% of the time offenders perpetrate an anti-black hate
crime, and only 20% anti-white, seems to argue for violent crime
motivated by racial bias to be a bigger problem for blacks than for
whites.
A small percentage of whites are racist.
Some of those racists are also violent against blacks.
A small percentage of blacks are racist.
Some of those racists are violent towards whites.
Overall it creates a larger problem for blacks than whites.
Racist attitudes, similar in shape to those you hold, provide a
justification for that violence in the minds of the offenders.
|11.4.07 @ 1:09PM|#
No role of genetics in socioeconmic status?
Not very large, actually.
http://www.santafe.edu/~bowles/2002JEP.pdf
http://www.santafe.edu/research/publications/workingpapers/01-01-005.pdf
|11.4.07 @ 1:24PM|#
The only reason hate crimes get the overwhelming attention
is because in the liberal lexicon being a "racist" is much more
evil than just being a regular old rapist or murder.
An equation using the standard sense of three common words,
"racist," "rapist," "evil."
Rapist = evil
Another
Racist = evil
Evil of rapist > evil of racist
Racist + Rapist = most evil case.
VM|11.4.07 @ 1:33PM|#
The only explanation that makes sense is elitist liberals
and blacks have a need to paint a picture of evil whites praying on
innocent, nobel blacks.
arwooo?
who is doing that hier? The only one who is presenting an evil vs
noble is you with your genetics causing socioeocnomic status.
"liberal elites"? that's funny! you make me laugh! and your cute
floppy ears really make me want to put ribbons in your hair!
*look out! Persian Dentists! RESIST RESIST!*
(I guess brits are genetically weak, too? That explains why you're
tougher than them? How can you explain the genetics causing libural
elitizm? So you're a genetic freak? You know what we do to
those.)
|11.4.07 @ 1:42PM|#
An equation using the standard sense of three common words,
"racist," "rapist," "evil."
Rapist = evil
Another
Racist = evil
Evil of rapist > evil of racist
Racist + Rapist = most evil case.
My calculation would be
Rapist = Evil
Evil of class jealousy > Evil of racism
Evil of rapist acting out of hatred of those better than him >
Evil of racist rapist
I don't see why either my or your prefrences should be written into
law though.
Neu Mejican|11.4.07 @ 1:56PM|#
Grande Chalupa (our shallow boat)
Tell me again how you are determining "class" versus "race?"
What is the intersection between the two?
And how do you justify your equation:
evil of "acting out of hatred of those better than
him" > evil of acting out of hatred of those
different than him?
better by what metric?
Neu Mejican|11.4.07 @ 2:00PM|#
It seems our shallow boat's equation is based on this
conceptualization...
Acts based on jealousy are worse than acts based on
xenophobia.
Does that make xenophobia a legitimate justification for lesser
evils as well, such as denial of equal consideration in social and
government policy?
|11.4.07 @ 2:08PM|#
Chalupa, have you ever lived in a majority black city or neighborhood? I have (and currently do). I've never been the victim of a crime, I've never really felt unsafe, and I don't wet my pants when I see a black face.
|11.4.07 @ 2:09PM|#
In other words Grande Chalupa (our shallow boat), let us, for
the sake of argument, take your essentialist world view as both
legitimate and correct in its description of the world.
If, according to that view, race determines worth due to average
tendency for certain universally agreed upon negative behaviors,
then what social and government policy changes flow from
that?
Given the essentialist view, does the difference in someone's basic
nature justify different treatment under the law?
Note, that the essentialist view is not the same view used by
"liberals" to justify policies such as affirmative action.
Affirmative action is based on differences in the external
situation between two individuals, not on constitutional
differences that flow from their essential nature.
|11.4.07 @ 2:16PM|#
Mejican-
From a previous thread I asked him a similar question and he
basically said non-white and non-East Asian immigration should end.
Which is funny because that would exclude his own family.
|11.4.07 @ 2:24PM|#
And Grande Chalupa,
Have you considered that it is really the mesomorphs that have the
highest crime rate? (see Sheldon's work on this from the 40's and
50's)
(http://www.kheper.net/topics/typology/somatotypes.html)
Mesomorphy, of course, is mostly a genetic trait. Does it justify
special policies to address the dangers of having mesomorphs among
us?
|11.4.07 @ 2:31PM|#
A recent piece of research,
http://euc.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/2/3/287
This article puts forward a theory that takes account of
biological as well as environmental factors, and predicts that
variables such as age, gender and social status will be associated
with offending probabilities. It is argued that male sex hormones
operating on the human brain increase the probability of
competitive/victimizing behaviour. This type of behaviour (or
behavioural tendency) is hypothesized to exist along a continuum,
with 'crude' (criminal) forms at one end and 'sophisticated'
(commercial) forms at the other. Individuals with the greatest
capacities to learn and plan will move rapidly after puberty from
criminal to non-criminal forms of competitive/victimizing
behaviour. The theory predicts among other things that serious
criminality will be concentrated in adolescent and young adult
males of low social status. Evidence is reviewed on links between
criminality and various biological variables, including
testosterone, mesomorphy, maternal smoking during pregnancy,
hypoglycemia, epilepsy, altered heart rate and skin conductivity,
cortisol, serotonin, monoamine oxidase, and certain brainwave
patterns.
I note that even this essentialist theory of crime does not include
race as an explanatory component.
Mesomorphy and gender play a role.
I think we need to stop immigration of men. Only allow women in.
That would have the biggest impact on crime.
Neu Mejican|11.4.07 @ 2:33PM|#
*for the shallow thinkers among us...I don't think essentialist arguments do a very good job at explaining complex human behaviors.
Shallow Thinker|11.4.07 @ 2:36PM|#
hrumph.
*stares out the window wondering about the mystery that is New
Mejican*
*dammit. My Taco Bell fell on the floor. I dropped my... wait for
it.
I dropped my...
taco.
|11.4.07 @ 3:11PM|#
In other words Grande Chalupa (our shallow boat), let us,
for the sake of argument, take your essentialist world view as both
legitimate and correct in its description of the world.
If, according to that view, race determines worth due to average
tendency for certain universally agreed upon negative behaviors,
then what social and government policy changes flow from
that?
Given the essentialist view, does the difference in someone's basic
nature justify different treatment under the law?
No, let's end affirmative action, aid to Africa, "hate crimes"
nonsense, all diversity programs, make Black Entertainment
Television just as socially unacceptable as the KKK and treat
everybody equal.
As Thomas Sowell said "Saying everybody should be treated equal and
be judged by the same standards would've made you a radical in the
50s, a liberal in the 60s and a racist today."
I personally believe in a free society blacks will end up poorer
and more criminal on average regardless, but by all means let them
prove me wrong. And of course considering the races will always
live in unequal circumstance blacks will always claim they are
opressed rather than facing their inferiority so racial tensions
will be inevitable. That's why it would've better had blacks and
whites never lived in the same societies in the first place, but
its too late to do anything about that now and the fault lies
completley with Europeans for that.
Of course I dream about a robust eugenics program but naturally am
wary of government with that kind of power. It's neccessary to
create conditions for the best of humanity to breed and try to stop
the worst from doing so. We don't need any kind of Nazi
dictatorship for that, it can be done through more rational charity
and financial incentives. At the very least we can stop subsidizing
illegitimate children!
Oh well, I can dream.
|11.4.07 @ 3:24PM|#
Grande Chalupa (our shallow boat),
Of course I dream about a robust eugenics program...to create
conditions for the best of humanity to breed and try to stop the
worst from doing so.
Ok,you think that this eugenics program should be based on breeding
between "the best." So, if I follow your twisted logic, you are
advocating intra-racial breeding only.
Your understanding of genetics seems even weaker than I thought,
since you believe that inbreeding will produce the "best"
results?
A more successful eugenics program* would require inter-racial
breeding, which is facilitated by social mixing of the races.
*talk about your difficult to define concepts.
Neu Mejican|11.4.07 @ 3:38PM|#
Black Entertainment Television just as socially unacceptable
as the KKK
Wait a second.
Is our shallow boat really Aaron McGruder?
http://www.theapesheet.com/archivesix/mcgruder.html
iih|11.4.07 @ 3:39PM|#
That is soooo wierd.... today while driving I thought to myself "Hmmmm, I haven't seen Chalupa in many days on H&R! I wonder what happened." And lo and behold here he is!
Neu Mejican|11.4.07 @ 3:46PM|#
Re: BET
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4764178337558873839
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riley_Wuz_Here
iih|11.4.07 @ 3:48PM|#
I am sure everyone is enjoying the rich intellectual discussion with Grand Chalupa, but have you met the King himself yet?
|11.4.07 @ 3:50PM|#
When you say what I would favor are you asking me what I would
do if I was an absolute dictator or what are more realistic
policies I favor that could be accomplished in America?
I'm not iterested in telling people specifically who to breed
with.
If I was an absolute dictator...
-Only allow white immigrants and encourage white people to have
many children in order to get the population of America 90% white
or so. Then we allow in only the best of Asia, Latin America and
Africa. Best can be determined by looks, intelligence, financial
success, health and lack of being prone to criminality. My desire
for racial homogeonity is based more on Huntingtonian concepts of a
nation rather than genetics.
-Sterilize convicted murders and rapists, the handicapped and
anybody with a low enough IQ.
-Encourage the good looking and intelligent to procreate. This may
be difficult to do while maintaing a free society. Financial
incentives seem the least intrusive way to do it. Maybe we can
offer free plastic surgery to those with deformities in exchange
for them agreeing to sterilize themselves. Or free health care to
people with heridatary diseases to do the same. In today's world we
debate liberty vs. equality. In my fantasyland it's liberty vs.
improving the species.
Of course none of that will ever happened. Back on earth, I
favor...
-Ending affirmative action
-Closing the border
-Getting rid of all forms of social welfare
-Ending foreign aid
In other words, I support Ron Paul!
|11.4.07 @ 3:52PM|#
I still find it funny that if we followed your advice, Chalupa, you would be in Damascus right now.
|11.4.07 @ 3:52PM|#
That is soooo wierd.... today while driving I thought to
myself "Hmmmm, I haven't seen Chalupa in many days on H&R! I
wonder what happened." And lo and behold here he is!
So it's your fault, iih? I should have expected that. You are aware
that you WILL have to do some form of penance.
Irresponsible, evil thoughts are not to be taken lightly.
|11.4.07 @ 3:55PM|#
I still find it funny that if we followed your advice,
Chalupa, you would be in Damascus right now.
And sterilized.
iih|11.4.07 @ 3:57PM|#
So it's your fault, iih? I should have expected that. You are aware
that you WILL have to do some form of penance. Irresponsible, evil
thoughts are not to be taken lightly.
I have to pay for it. I am actually off to watch the BIG GAME.
|11.4.07 @ 3:58PM|#
So Chalupa, you would like to be a Soviet Central Planner? Yeah, I mean, central planning culture and genetics has to work just as well as centrally planning economies, right? Right?
|11.4.07 @ 4:55PM|#
I still find it funny that if we followed your advice,
Chalupa, you would be in Damascus right now.
Did you miss the part about the best non-whites in the world being
assimilated into the gene pool? It's extremly easy for ones with
handsome features and high IQs like myself.
Central genetic planning is a fantasy. What we could do though, is
at least stop actively working against the species with charity,
social welfare, etc. I also like Ron Paul's take on states rights.
Perhaps I would one day be able to grab power in Idaho or Wyoming
and build my master race at the state level.
|11.4.07 @ 5:13PM|#
It's extremly easy for ones with handsome features and high
IQs like myself.
I've only had one other person in my life say something like this
to me, and he was really high on powder at the time. If you happen
to be under the influence, have fun, don't drive, and come down
gently!
On the other hand, if you were sober/clean when you wrote that, it
just makes you a massive prick.
SIV|11.4.07 @ 5:36PM|#
From a previous thread I asked him a similar question and he
basically said non-white and non-East Asian immigration should
end.
Does every weekend thread turn into "Who are White People". Nearly
everyone from the Middle East or "Near Asia" as well as most North
Africans and the majority of those from the Indian Sub-Continent
are Caucasian.
Fred Thompson's dope dealer
iih|11.4.07 @ 5:48PM|#
Yes, please just ignore Chalupa. His discussions are usually extremely boring and minimally intellectual, and repetitive.
|11.4.07 @ 6:03PM|#
Does every weekend thread turn into "Who are White People".
Nearly everyone from the Middle East or "Near Asia" as well as most
North Africans and the majority of those from the Indian
Sub-Continent are Caucasian.
So Bobby Jindal isn't the first non-white governor of a
deep-south state since reconstruction?
As for Thompson's dope dealer, someone should ask him if his friend
would have been better off spending the last 20 years in
prison.
SIV|11.4.07 @ 6:27PM|#
So Bobby Jindal isn't the first non-white governor of a
deep-south state since reconstruction?
He is "non-white" but he is Caucasian.
I'm trying to use a standard taxonomic definition. "Race" is all so
much bullshit.
Are Jews "White"?
For your identity politics lefty women and gays probably can't be
white people. Excepting Republican women and closeted gays of
course they are "white".
Fred's pilot was convicted of more than 20 years worth of drug
crimes under todays laws.
I would doubt he supports the WoDs.
|11.4.07 @ 6:31PM|#
Fred's pilot was convicted of more than 20 years worth of
drug crimes under todays laws.
I would doubt he supports the WoDs.
Of course the pilot doesn't. But Fred does. At least I assume he
does. There are only a few candidates that want to even remotely
reform the war on drugs--
Ron Paul
Dennis K.
Mike Gravel
and now Chris Dodd.
I wish the list were longer. But can't "send the wrong message to
the children" as John Edwards would say.
iih|11.4.07 @ 6:33PM|#
I would doubt he supports the WoDs.
I think he would. He would probably make less money than when it is
illegal.
SIV|11.4.07 @ 6:46PM|#
Cesar:
Of those candidates, Paul is the frontrunner!
Fred is the only other candidate, and the only "top tier", to have
a history of support of Federalism.
|11.4.07 @ 6:53PM|#
I think he would. He would probably make less money than
when it is illegal.
There is mountains of truth in that statement. If you really want
to hurt the columbian drug lords, END
PROHIBITION.
Nah, that would be too damned easy. No funds for the CIA, DEA, FBI,
state and local goon squads police departments, Coast
Guard, BATF, and whoever I'm omitting.
But, y'know, it would work. Drug lord income would plummet to near
zero, the peasants raising the formerly illicit crops would be
better off, and the endemic police corruption and narco terrorism
in Latin Amaerica would be dealt a major, likely fatal, blow. Those
are just the positive effects, that I'd bet on, outside our
borders! Domestically, well you know the major positives and the
minor negatives.
Oh yeah, I forgot foreign aid for drug interdiction and
eradication.
[/screed]
|11.4.07 @ 7:03PM|#
"An analysis of available race data for the 6,804 known hate
crime offenders revealed that:
* 60.5 percent were white.
* 19.9 percent were black."
the problem with this statistic is that it fails to take into
account the "hispanic" thang.
this is how it works. hispanic is a ethnicity, not a race. it
basically means being from a spanish speaking culture. thus one can
be white hispanic, black hispanic (think cuba) or even asian
hispanic (rarer, but still possible.
there is a LOT of violent crime between blacks and hispanics (heck,
in LA alone... think rival gangs).
when a black guy commits a "hate crime" against an hispanic (the
vast majority of hispanics ARE white), it goes down as hispanic
victim and black offender
however... when a hispanic (who happens to be white) commits a
"hate crime" against a black victim, it goes down as a white on
black hate crime
iow, hispanic is a "victim class" but when hispanics are offenders,
their race (which is usually white) is the registered
demographic.
this does tend to skew the stats.
regardless, the reality is clear that blacks commit a
disproportionate amount of "hate crimes" vs. whites, which is kind
of ironic considering that they are viewed constantly as victims of
hate crimes (which they certainly are) but rarely as offenders
(which they also are) of hate crimes.
iih|11.4.07 @ 7:03PM|#
J sub D:
It is easy (I think). Has this person ever called for legalization?
If he never did (more likely), then he's probably better off with
it illegal than legal.
|11.4.07 @ 7:21PM|#
As many have pointed out, the problems associated with even
defining race are nigh insurmountable. I contend the Barack Obama
is "white" and Tiger Woods is "asian". Any argument against my
classifications have no more, and in Tiger's case probably less,
validity. What all of this crap leads to is if Barack Obama attacks
Tiger Woods at a charity golf tourney it is:
A) Black on black crime.
B) Black on Asian crime.
C) White on black crime.
D) White on Asian crime,
I'm confident that groves of trees have been sacrificed for all of
the studies, instuctions and memoranda written about this subject.
Perhaps in the aforementioned assault case we should describe it
as:
E) Adult male on Adult male crime.
Attempting to define individuals as members of groups based on ill
defined and irrelevant characteristics (race)* demeans them as
individuals. That IS a crime.
*Ectomorphs rule!
|11.4.07 @ 7:35PM|#
Fred is the only other candidate, and the only "top tier",
to have a history of support of Federalism.
Federalism without anti-Prohibitionism is dead to me.
iih|11.4.07 @ 7:39PM|#
I am now starting to wonder whether Ron Paul's 30-year run for congress was a good presidential career move, given that Freddie is now considered top-tier. RP should have opted for Hollywood.
|11.4.07 @ 7:45PM|#
Of course, SIV, the question is would Fred Thompson's support of federalism allow Grand Chalupa to become Il Duce of Wyoming into and make it a breeding ground for the MasterRace and let F. Le Mur do the same in Idaho?
|11.4.07 @ 7:52PM|#
SOME of you appear to have forgotten to read the last few Asimov
books; in which we learn that Hari Seldon is merely a puppet being
mind-controlled by the 50-Kyear-old super-robot Daneel
Olivaw.
So Krugman wants to be a puppet?
|11.4.07 @ 7:56PM|#
As with most of Asimov's work, The Foundation arc was filled
with insights. One quote from Foundation that resonates today is,
"Never let your sense of morality keep you from doing what's
right."
Isaac was a lefty, but had a fantastic grasp of history. I read his
"Chronology of the World" over and over. His insight into the
betrayals and cowardice leading up to WWII make me wonder if he
would be comfortable with the moonbat left today.
|11.4.07 @ 7:56PM|#
Since Red State went batshit over Ron Paul, if anyone is interested apparently the liberal femi-blog Pandagon has too. They've brought out all the usual tropes about libertarians. Ron Paul doesn't believe in roads, Ron Paul hates poor people, Ron Paul hates women. He hates blacks. Did I mention he hates women and blacks wants everyone in Drafur to die? Its a hilarious read in its ignorance.
SIV|11.4.07 @ 8:11PM|#
Cesar:
The PandaTwats have one thing right:
If Republicans were smart they would actually embrace and back
Ron Paul. Then he might have a chance at winning. Their only issue
with Ron Paul they don't like is that he wants out of Iraq.
Everything else (totally fucking dismantle government) the
Republicans, Conservatives, and Libertarians are on board
with.
They understand the relationship of libertarians and conservatives
better than most Hit & Run commenters and Libertarians do.
|11.4.07 @ 8:12PM|#
Our shallow boat says:
It's extremly easy for ones with handsome features and high IQs
like myself.
Cesar replies
if you were sober/clean when you wrote that, it just makes you
a massive prick.
I don't think that was the sentence that he wrote that makes him a
massive prick...
JsubD,
Like I should trust the words of an ectomorph...
Endomorphs Unite!
Viva las Gordas!
|11.4.07 @ 8:16PM|#
If Republicans were smart they would actually embrace and
back Ron Paul. Then he might have a chance at winning.
That much is true.
Their only issue with Ron Paul they don't like is that he wants
out of Iraq.
Thats completely false.
Everything else (totally fucking dismantle government) the
Republicans, Conservatives, and Libertarians are on board
with.
Now, that demonstrates they have a third-grade Manichaean view of
politics (RED VS. BLUE!!!!!) thats for sure!
And we don't want to dismantle the government. We want to
dramatically reduce it. Confusing, again, libertarianism with
all-out anarchism. Yes, that can include infrastructure i.e. roads
and bridges. One billion dollars for a shrimp museum in Louisiana?
Not so much. Shocking, I know!
|11.4.07 @ 8:17PM|#
"Everything else (totally fucking dismantle government) the
Republicans, Conservatives, and Libertarians are on board
with."
Who are these Republicans who want to "totally fucking dismantle
government"? Are they off somewhere playing poker with the Yeti,
Elvis, and the Loch Ness Monster?
|11.4.07 @ 8:20PM|#
Who are these Republicans who want to "totally fucking
dismantle government"? Are they off somewhere playing poker with
the Yeti, Elvis, and the Loch Ness Monster?
TEH EVIL RETHUGLICANZ ARE OUT TO MAKE OUR BRIDGES COLLAPSE!!!!
HAVENT U HEARD??
iih|11.4.07 @ 8:20PM|#
Cesar:
Just tried posting on their blog, but my message wouldn't appear.
May be because I used a false email address.
|11.4.07 @ 8:22PM|#
The moderate comments there. Its an echo-chamber. If they don't like what you say, they replace your post with a Youtube video of bad 80s bands. Don't bother posting there, its not worth it. Just watch, it gets pretty funny.
iih|11.4.07 @ 8:32PM|#
How many years will it take until those democratic party liberal
supporters realize that big government programs will only result in
utter failure? 20-30 years after they succeed in having universal
health care? If this is the only way they'll get to find out, I'd
say give it to them so that it becomes empirically verified that
the system would be screwed.
BTW, I had never made my mind about minimum wage (remember, I was
not conscientiously "libertarian-leaning" before early
last summer) until I heard Walter Block's Mises Institute talk on the subject.
|11.4.07 @ 8:33PM|#
I used to daydream about basically the same thing: becoming such a great economist that I could predict and manipulate the macro-economy with pinpoint precision. Then I studied more advanced economics, and learned that that was impossible.
Neu Mejican|11.4.07 @ 8:38PM|#
Whit
the reality is clear that blacks commit a disproportionate
amount of "hate crimes" vs. whites, which is kind of ironic
considering that they are viewed constantly as victims of hate
crimes (which they certainly are) but rarely as offenders (which
they also are) of hate crimes.
Hate crimes motivated by the offender's bias toward a particular
ethnicity/national origin were directed at 1,228 victims. Of these
victims:
* 58.8 percent(722)were targeted because of an anti-Hispanic
bias.
* 41.2 percent were victimized because of a bias against other
ethnicities/national origins.
So if we take the number of white victims and add them to black on
white crimes we get 975 + 722 = 1697
Total black victims in the same time period = 3,322 (1.7 times the
total number of victims).
If we look at proportionate victims, with whites outnumbering black
by about 8 times...
The reality is clear that blacks are victims of a disproportionate
amount of "hate crimes" vs. whites. Which might explain the reason
for the common sense view on the topic that it is a larger problem
for the (smaller) black community than it is for the (much larger)
white community.
|11.4.07 @ 8:43PM|#
Cesar, I sent Pandagon a nice little pro-Ron note. I didn't say fuck you, asshat or dumbshit once. Self discipline like that is not normally one of my traits.
|11.4.07 @ 8:43PM|#
Whit,
The total numbers of offenders, of course, is unaffected by the
bias you note.
Race of offender is kept independent of victim..
iirc around 4000 for white offenders
around 1000 for blacks.
I wonder if the disproportionate targeting of blacks might result
in a back-lash effect that explains part of the disproportionate
number of blacks involved in hate-crimes.
|11.4.07 @ 8:46PM|#
J Sub D-
I think it was you that agreed with me its ridiculous how Team Red
and Team Blue each think their opposite has some master coherent
strategy that they work day and night to implement omnipotently. If
you want that kind of nutjob talk from Team Blue, look no further
than Pandagon!
I think its also very funny that they think a freaking OBGYN is a
woman-hating misogynist! God, the mental gymnastics one would have
to pull off to believe that.
|11.4.07 @ 8:51PM|#
I didn't say fuck you, asshat or dumbshit once.
Twice?
Oh ye of little faith. :-]
Neu Mejican|11.4.07 @ 8:51PM|#
Cesar,
It only takes one watching of the filmography of David Cronenberg
to get those mental gymnastic fully fleshed out.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0094964/
Chris Smith|11.4.07 @ 8:55PM|#
@Aresen
The Foundation novels treated history as if it were some Newtonian,
deterministic thing.
People are far more chaotic than that.
The novels are more naive than repulsive.
|11.4.07 @ 8:59PM|#
He wasn't mind controlled by Daneel Olivaw, more like manipulated by him. And he also had a hot robot chick for a girlfriend. Maybe that's what Krugman wants?
|11.4.07 @ 9:03PM|#
Kenny -- AJAs are the most party-line Democratic voting bloc in
Hawaii, especially with the older generation. The newer generation,
not quite so much so. It's hard to break out voting results by
ethnicity, since that's not listed on the ballot, but after going
door-to-door to every walkable house in the district it was pretty
clear who was voting for me and who wasn't. I could usually get a
sense if I had someone's vote before I got to their door:
Well-maintained yards in an upscale neighborhood were generally
votes for me. Angry dogs in debris-strewn yards with cars sporting
pro-union bumper stickers on a rusted fender -- not so much
so.
Trying to read anything into Lingle's reelection campaign can be
misleading, because she won 51 out of 51 House districts against an
exceedingly weak candidate -- and because Lingle is a centrist who
could easily run as a Democrat if she so chose to. She gets votes
that no other Republican in Hawaii can get.
I'm impressed that you deduced who I was from the few personal
items I dropped in my comments. Are you in Naval Intelligence? As
for your concern about that being perceived as creepy -- didn't
really register on my radar. You meet a lot of tweaked out people
on the campaign trail if you meet thousands of people like I did.
Hell, a few of them right here on Reason, proudly displaying their
dysfunctions for all the really, really tiny libertarian world to
see.
OTOH, if you really are an axe-wielding sociopathic creep, please
let me know so I can stock up on ammo, yeah? ;)
|11.4.07 @ 9:06PM|#
first of all, if white hispancis are counted as whites (but not
hispanics) as offenders, but as hispanics when they are victims,
that necessarily underrepresents the reality of whites as victims,
and overrepresents them as offenders.
also, according to the UCR: "Among the 8,433 known offenders
reported to be associated with hate crime incidents, 59 percent
were white, and 27 percent were black"
so 27 percent of offenders were black but blacks only make up about
13% of the population.
how can this disparity not be more clear?
|11.4.07 @ 9:11PM|#
Cesar, these people over at Pandagon seem like they might be
fun. Maybe I'll stop in occasionally, stink up the conversation
with a paragraph or two, listen to some rightious, ill informed
anger and leave. It could be fun. Wait till they hear my views on
"hate crimes". Y'know, unlike all of the "love crimes" we have
going down in the big city.
Anyway, thanks for the site alert. It semms like spinning 'em up
will be like hunting at the zoo. No trolling, just honest informed,
mostly libertarian opinion. I could be a troll, but there's that
damned pride thingee...
iih|11.4.07 @ 9:13PM|#
J sub D: Did your post get published? I got two already :-) Someone attacked my writing ability already.
|11.4.07 @ 9:15PM|#
Liberals can be fun as long as you don't mention Republicans to
them.. Then they turn into raging maniacs screaming about how
George Bush and Dick Cheney are secretly planning in the basement
of the white house to repeal the 13th amendment and conquer the
world or something.
If you want to comment there, start on topics you agree with
liberals on. Drugs, gays, abortion (if inclined to be pro-choice),
and Republican douchebaggery. Then after a few weeks start on a
thread you disagree with them on. Harder to label you as a Team Red
"fellow traveler" then. Thats what I generally do if I feel
inclined to comment on liberal blogs.
iih|11.4.07 @ 9:18PM|#
Then they turn into raging maniacs screaming about how
George Bush and Dick Cheney are secretly planning in the basement
of the white house to repeal the 13th amendment and conquer the
world or something.
They aren't?
If you want to comment there, start on topics you agree with
liberals on. Drugs, gays, abortion (if inclined to be pro-choice),
and Republican douchebaggery. Then after a few weeks start on a
thread you disagree with them on. Harder to label you as a Team Red
"fellow traveler" then. Thats what I generally do if I feel
inclined to comment on liberal blogs.
Being in a liberal state, this is what I am getting to find
out.
|11.4.07 @ 9:19PM|#
No, iih, I don't think they are. At worst, they just want money and power. At best, they really think they are improving the country. I like to assume people who disagree with me are wrong before I conclude they are evil. Never attribute to malice what can be attributed to incompetence and error.
|11.4.07 @ 9:19PM|#
first of all, if white hispancis are counted as whites (but
not hispanics) as offenders, but as hispanics when they are
victims, that necessarily underrepresents the reality of whites as
victims, and overrepresents them as offenders.
also, according to the UCR: "Among the 8,433 known offenders
reported to be associated with hate crime incidents, 59 percent
were white, and 27 percent were black"
so 27 percent of offenders were black but blacks only make up about
13% of the population.
how can this disparity not be more clear?
And what exactly is the nature of these "hate crimes" anyway? What
percentage is stuff like hanging a noose from a tree or getting in
a bar fight and shouting out a racial slur in the heat of the
moment?
I'm much more interested in overall crime rates, not this PC
garbage.
|11.4.07 @ 9:22PM|#
J sub D: Did your post get published?
No. It must have been something I said. ;-) Really, I didn't cuss.
I did link to the WoD Clock and said REMEMBER KATHRYN
JOHNSTON! but that shouldn't have raised too much of a
stink.
Maybe I screwed up my post. There's a first time for
everything.
iih|11.4.07 @ 9:23PM|#
Cesar-
I really do agree with you. I was just being sarcastic. When you
said:
I like to assume people who disagree with me are wrong before I
conclude they are evil. Never attribute to malice what can be
attributed to incompetence and error.
I immediately remembered a famous saying by a 10th or 11th century
philosopher/thinker who once said:
"I am correct, but might be wrong. My opponent is wrong, but might
be correct."
This is deep! Think how American politicians would be like if they
adopted this approach.
iih|11.4.07 @ 9:26PM|#
Do post what you said here in case it doesn't get
published.
Yeah, J sub D, post here. Prove that you have been a good sport and
haven't cursed.
|11.4.07 @ 9:34PM|#
My favorite part of the Pandagon thread is right at the beginning where everyone is going apeshit over the fact that RP wants to issue letters of marque and reprisal against al-Qaeda and its leaders. I'm guessing they don't understand what a letter of marque and reprisal is, since they presumably support the much more destructive (though justified) war in Afghanistan.
|11.4.07 @ 9:34PM|#
Asimov based the Foundation stories on "The Decline and Fall of
the Roman Empire." The Foundation is a rough analogue of the
Catholic Church and Hari Seldon is a rough analogue of
Christ.
So Krugman wants to establish his own church with himself as the
Messiah. I'm not surprised.
|11.4.07 @ 9:40PM|#
Crimethink-
I thought that was pretty damn funny too. They actually think it
means Ron Paul wants us to prey on the shipping of other nations!
Morons.
|11.4.07 @ 10:02PM|#
That person picking on iih's grammar is ... wow. Shooting another hole in the myth of progressives being more tolerant of ambiguity, (s)he is.
iih|11.4.07 @ 10:17PM|#
I am now really curious, what could have J sub D have said
(politely) that wouldn
t warrant publication of his post? Hmmmm.
|11.4.07 @ 10:27PM|#
Chris Smith | November 4, 2007, 8:55pm | #
@Aresen
The Foundation novels treated history as if it were some Newtonian, deterministic thing.
People are far more chaotic than that.
The novels are more naive than repulsive.
I agree that human affairs are chaotic - and, in that sense - the
novels are naive. I still call them repulsive in the sense that,
postutating a 'social science' which could be so deterministic,
there should exist any group with such power - the Second
Foundation, the Master Computer, God, whatever - to control the
destiny and affairs of the human race.
To be fair to Asimov, I think that he himself would have doubted
the possibility that such a science could exist. Thinking of
present day humanity alone, we are examining a system of 6 x 10^9
variables. I understand that the difficulty of solving an equation
rises at least exponentially with the number of variables. (Any
mathematians, please confirm or correct me on this!) It would
appear, therefore, that even if such a theoretical science could
exist, the equations would be unsolvable.
|11.4.07 @ 10:47PM|#
iih | November 4, 2007, 10:17pm | #
I am now really curious, what could have J sub D have said (politely) that wouldn
t warrant publication of his post? Hmmmm.
I am quite sure that J sub D would not submit a tasteless comment
any more than I would.
Uh, maybe I should rephrase that.
Thomas Paine\'s Goiter|11.4.07 @ 11:37PM|#
Isn't it strange that Muslims tend to do much better in
countries that don't have Muslim majorities?
Tanzania?
|11.4.07 @ 11:47PM|#
iih,
FWIW, they also didn't post the thing I wrote, in which I politely
explained the back story around the "Paul is a racist"
article...but the guy who was criticizing your grammar posted again
after I did, and they published his...
|11.4.07 @ 11:55PM|#
Those Canucks aren't doing very well in the NHL!
Fortunately, I'm not a Canucks fan.
Unfortunately, I cheer for the Oilers. (I grew up in Edmonchuk,
what can I say?)
Thomas Paine\'s Goiter|11.4.07 @ 11:56PM|#
Unfortunately, I cheer for the Oilers. (I grew up in
Edmonchuk, what can I say?)
Injuries are destroying us this year.
iih|11.5.07 @ 12:00AM|#
Isn't it strange that Muslims tend to do much better in
countries that don't have Muslim majorities?
Tanzania?
The US, Canada?
iih|11.5.07 @ 12:01AM|#
crimethink:
They posted mine at 12:31. May be you argued better than I do for
RP, that must be why.
Kolohe|11.5.07 @ 1:07AM|#
Re: the Pandagon thread
I understand the symbology of the I-35 bridge, but what's the deal
with the floater dude(?) in a hawaiian shirt and hotpants?
|11.5.07 @ 1:19AM|#
Well,not to put to fine a point on it,but Paul Krugman is 'at the opposite end of the galaxy' from both Hari Seldon AND Isaac Asimov.
herodotus|11.5.07 @ 8:41AM|#
Rock Journalism is the most pernicious anti-musical phenomonon
in modern history.
It is composed of musically illiterate music fans celebrating the
musical 'insights' of their favorite celebrities, whose musical
gifts (or lack thereof) they will never understand.
It is a celebration of the musical ignorance of the majority, and
it has as much to do with why modern pop music is as wretched as it
is as any 'greedy record executive'.
It mistakes celebrity gossip for music news.
It mistakes celebrities for musicians.
It extolls the virtues of the shallow and the photogenic over the
real substance of music, which it fails to understand, most of all
due to the fact that it's practicioners have no musical knowledge
and would hide it assiduously if they did have any.
Jesus F Christ Rolling Stone's vaunted reviewing staff greeted Led
Zeppelin's last album with a long diatribe concerning just why John
Bonham is such an annoying drummer!! One of the most universally
admired rock musicians of the past 30 years was dismissed with an
'I'm so cool' roll of the eyes.
Rolling Stone sucks.
ALL rock journalism sucks.
Sorry for the timing, but I didn't see this series of blog entries
until now.
VM|11.5.07 @ 9:52AM|#
Jan - dunno. But one thing seems certain, herodotus certainly doesn't read it...
|11.5.07 @ 10:20AM|#
"iih | November 3, 2007, 1:43pm | #
J sub D:
tsk tsk Canada does not have state parks ;-)"
If you meant that Canada does not have 'state' parks, because the
regional units are called 'provinces', you get a gold star for
nit-picking pedantry.
If you thought that Canada's provinces do not have provincial
parks, you are not a good prospect as a competitor on 'Are you
smarter than a 5th grader', although you will be laughed at.
|11.5.07 @ 10:41AM|#
newbury
Note the winking smiley at the end of iih's comment.
It indicates a joke.
You just won a gold star of your own.
|11.5.07 @ 10:59AM|#
Whit,
Blacks make up 13% of the population.
According to your numbers they commit 27% of the hate crimes.
"Among the 8,433 known offenders reported to be associated with
hate crime incidents, 59 percent were white, and 27 percent were
black"
That means blacks commit these crimes at a higher rate than their %
in the population. We agree.
Don't forget however, that blacks make up 13% of the population,
but bear the burden of 2/3rds of the hate crimes attributed to
racial or ethnic motivation.
So, in which direction is the disparity more severe? blacks
over-representation as offenders or blacks over-representation as
victims?
The numbers show strongly that their over-representation as victim
is much greater than their over-representation as offender. If
looking for an explanation as to why blacks are viewed as victims
of hate crimes more commonly than as perpetrators of hate crimes,
it might be the facts on the ground responsible for that
impression. A larger proportion of blacks are victims of hate
crimes than offenders.
The reverse is also true. A larger proportion of whites are
offenders involved in hate crimes than are victims of hate crimes
motivated by race or ethnicity.
white offenders about 5000
white victims about 2000
black offenders around 2000
black victims around 3500
If you want to talk proportions it is important to look at both
sides. 5 to 2 is a higher offender to victim ratio than is found
among blacks.
iih|11.5.07 @ 11:17AM|#
newbury:
'Are you smarter than a 5th grader
I have not watched it on CBC yet ;-)
|11.5.07 @ 11:25AM|#
No wonder Krugman idolizes the Foundation series, Asimov's
Foundation is the ultimate in liberal government. Never mind that
free will foolishness, just sit back and relax, and let the elite
who know best make all of the decisions for you. It's for your own
good!
I'd rather be one of the barbarians, thanks.
Hube|11.5.07 @ 11:44AM|#
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Foundation and
Earth and the prequel novels Prelude to Foundation
and Forward the Foundation set up the premise that R.
Daneel Olivaw was ultimately responsible for Seldon and his
psychohistory? (I dug the former book, but the prequels I couldn't
make it through -- they were awful.)
In addition, wasn't psychohistory made moot in Foundation and
Earth (or was it Foundation's Edge?) when Golan
Trevize made the decision for "Galaxia" -- that galaxy-wide
communal mind that would serve as a defense against any aliens that
eventually came upon the Milky Way? (In the Foundation-verse,
humans are the only intelligent species in the galaxy.)
|11.5.07 @ 1:42PM|#
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Foundation and Earth and
the prequel novels Prelude to Foundation and Forward the Foundation
set up the premise that R. Daneel Olivaw was ultimately responsible
for Seldon and his psychohistory? (I dug the former book, but the
prequels I couldn't make it through -- they were awful.)
In addition, wasn't psychohistory made moot in Foundation and Earth
(or was it Foundation's Edge?) when Golan Trevize made the decision
for "Galaxia"
Yes and yes.
I actually enjoyed "Foundation's Edge" and "Foundation and Earth."
Not great literature, to be certain, but readable.
|11.5.07 @ 1:52PM|#
Yeah, J sub D, post here. Prove that you have been a good
sport and haven't cursed.
It's over there now. An infuriating time delay.
|11.5.07 @ 6:56PM|#
Asimov's "Psychohistory" was premised on the idea that when
you're dealing with a galactic population in the trillions, the
influence of individuals on the population as a whole is basically
-nil-. Even the Galactic Emperor was helpless to prevent the
dissolution of the Empire.
The Mule was the exception that proved the rule. He was able to
modify the behavior of extremely large populations through
emotional control. Because he was sterile, however (and Asimov
didn't consider the possibility of cloning or genetic engineering
when he wrote the series) his influence was limited to his
lifetime.
The problem with psychohistory is of course that it assumes a kind
of uniformity across the "galactic population" that shouldn't
exist. The rules the psychohistorians derived based on their
observations of the people of Trantor worked equally well for the
people of Terminus and all the other worlds of the Empire. However
we know that human groups, when isolated from each other by
distance and/or culture, tend to develop unique manners and customs
that cannot be fully contained within a single umbrella of
predictive mathematics like psychohistory: ie. the exceptions to
the rule become the norm, hence no rule system can be
all-inclusive.
herodotus|11.5.07 @ 8:08PM|#
"Jan - dunno. But one thing seems certain, herodotus
certainly doesn't read it..."
Not without puking he doesn't.
gankomon|11.6.07 @ 2:12PM|#
On the subject of Pakistan and Bangladesh:
Britain (in the person of Viceroy Lord Louis Mountbatten) did NOT
want to separate them, and neither did the Congress Party, as
represented by Mahatma Gandhi and his closest lieutenant, the first
Indian Governor-General, Jawaharalal Nehru.
However, Mohammed Ali Jinnah, leader of the Indian Muslim Party and
the father of Pakistan, insisted and in fact made so much trouble
that eventually Mountbatten, who was working under a very tight
deadline, made the decision to go ahead and partition, with the
grudging agreement of Nehru and his Congress Party. British lawyer
Cyril Radcliffe was imported to draw the line, and it admittedly
caused a great deal of bloodshed. To this day India and Pakistan
are still arguing over Kashmir, which was a primarily Muslim
province, though it's ruling family was Hindu. Pakistan's name is
in fact an anagram and the 'K' stands for Kashmir.
Just thought you'd like to know. As for Asimov, I found him mostly
fairly boring and pretentious. I much prefer Keith Laumer and Jerry
Pournelle.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245