Wednesday, January 19, 2011

On the Absence of Critical Thinking


Hm.

There's been a study done that tracks the development of critical thinking skills among some 2,200 college students which finds that... many don't learn critical thinking skills in college and university.

This ties in with a post I made at the beginning of the year discussing what I regarded as the very deliberate determination by the Powers That Be (specifically Reaganists) toward the end of the Sixties to disable the critical thinking capabilities of public school students once and for all -- so as to make it impossible for public school students every to rise up again.

It's been successful.

One of the interesting aspects of the study is that, apparently, the researchers assumed students entered college and university without critical thinking skills, and they were supposed to learn them while in college/university.

The point I tried to make was that these skills were taught in public schools, at least in California, well before college, in my recollection beginning in junior high school. By the time I got to high school, practically every course reinforced and expanded critical thinking as part of the fundamental process of education.

There was a problem, however. If students as young as seventh or eighth grade could at least begin to apply critical thinking to what they were being taught in school and to what they were being told in the News, they would shortly come to the conclusion that they were being lied to, propagandized, and manipulated to become willing little servants of the Corporate State. (Yes, even then, we knew what and who was really in charge.)

And that would generally lead to rebellion, as it did among America's students throughout the mid-and-later Sixties.

So. What do you do if you want to suppress rebellion? You make it difficult or impossible for students to learn critical thinking skills.

Sure enough.

One of the key factors of the study is that:

Many of the students graduated without knowing how to sift fact from opinion, make a clear written argument or objectively review conflicting reports of a situation or event, according to New York University sociologist Richard Arum, lead author of the study. The students, for example, couldn't determine the cause of an increase in neighborhood crime or how best to respond without being swayed by emotional testimony and political spin.

Read more: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2011/01/18/106949/study-many-college-students-not.html#ixzz1BVAzLxND



Indeed. That's the point.

If someone is incapable of sorting fact from opinion or speculation, then "all things are true, all things are false." This is where the "he said/she said" false equivalence reporting so beloved of the Post-Modern Press comes from.

I found it interesting too that business, social science work, and communications majors had the most difficult time understanding and using critical thinking skills.

It does explain a great deal about why so much of the "discussion" these days is so strange and so pointless.

Tuesday, January 18, 2011

Well, well, well. According to the Twitter, Baby Doc was just arrested

Taken from his luxury hotel by police. Well, well, well.

Of course, it's Twitter. So you can't ever be sure.

http://twitter.com/MacMcClelland

-----------------

As we say, things may not be what they appear. From the Twitter:

Decoy! UN soldiers cleared a path to the waiting police truck, then took Duvalier out a different door. less than 20 seconds ago via tweetymail


Stay tuned!

CAKE

From "Showroom of Compassion." First new album in 7 years.

John is getting gray.

The creep of time.

"Sick of You:"



Whole album still available for streaming at Rolling Stone.

Support local music!

Monday, January 17, 2011

MLK Double Teamed on the Mike Douglas Show in 1967

I may have posted this interview before, but it is always worth a reminder and review.





As for the Tunisia Thing


I haven't been following it much, for there is always the undercurrent in these things that tells us what we see -- or are allowed to see -- is only a superficial gloss on something much more deep-seated. I would not take anyone's word for anything about the "Revolution" in Tunisia.

What I find interesting, though, is the attempt to inject WikiLeaks into the action, on the basis of some cables that came from somewhere, which purport to show that the US State Department knew that Tunisia was ruled by a kleptocracy and that things would have to change.

Nobody knows exactly where the cables came from, whether they are authentic, or anything about them, but there they were being touted by all sorts of mainstream media (Business Week, Foreign Policy, and... of course... Andrew Sullivan at the Atlantic) and you've just got to wonder.

I've never thought that things are what they seem to be with WikiLeaks, but at the same time, it's all so slippery and slimy, I don't know how anyone can untangle it. It is certainly convenient to think that Revolutions can be triggered by the revelations in the WikiLeaks docs, but the problem with that notion is that at this time, WikiLeaks isn't releasing the State Department docs until after they have been vetted and scrubbed by its Media Partners and the State Department. In other words, the State Department doc dump is being performed strictly by the Rules of the Game, and nothing that makes it into the public domain is anything except what the Powers That Be want.

Furthermore, back in December, Julian gave an interview to ABC News -- which he overly dramatically flounced out of after being questioned about the Sex Crimes allegations in Sweden, at the very end of a long interview (ed note: obviously a set up) -- in which he stated that by golly, WikiLeaks was working with a number of smaller news organizations to get the State Department docs out more quickly. Then, in January, he repeated this claim. There's been no evidence of it, however. What there has been, at least according to some reports, is the acquisition of WikiLeaks leaks, in whole or in part, by (apparently) unauthorized media outlets. What they do with them remains to be seen.

Meanwhile back in Tunisia, it seems obvious, to the extent anything is "obvious" about what's going on there, that the People have known full well of the corruption and self-dealing at the top, and the issue for them has always been about the obscene levels of exploitation and oppression they have been under. There is no sign yet that that's going to change. This appears to be yet another Neo-Liberal coup, not a Revolution at all, which will have the effect of tightening the screws.

How convenient.

And have you heard? Baby Doc has returned to Haiti from his luxury-exile in Paris. I wonder if Bill or Hillary gave him a call...

Sunday, January 16, 2011

Haiti a Year On


A year after the earthquake, Haitians are still in desperate straits: almost no rebuilding, a dreadful cholera epidemic that was not prepared for or anticipated in advance, a non-functional central government, a million residents still under tents and tarps, and more than 10,000 NGOs delivering "aid" -- but every one of them protecting their turf and their funding first and foremost.

What's happened in Haiti since the earthquake is a tragedy for the Haitians, and a shame for the world community that pledged so much assistance to rebuild.

What's happened is a descent into Modern Medievalism.

There is no central government in Haiti except in the abstract, much as was the case in Europe during the Dark Ages; one doesn't even know who the president might be, and it hardly matters given the fact that the "government" -- such as it is -- is essentially non-functional having suffered so many losses during the earthquake.

Consequently, a proliferation of NGOs are filling a vacuum of authority and power, but only partially, and only to the extent they are protecting their turf and their funding. They are doing as little as possible for and with the Haitian people, while they primarily look after their own interests and affairs in competition with all the other NGOs.

There is no coordination of effort, no common interest, no more than minimal "service" to the Haitian People. It is private interest every step of the way, and that is a huge reason why there is no progress at all. "Oh, but it could be so much worse without us!" cry the NGOs. Maybe, maybe not. But the Haitians are rightly fed up with the state of affairs they are subject to, and given some of the violent incidents in response to the cholera epidemic especially, they are on the verge of general insurrection.

This is pretty much what everyone's future will look like when government is reduced to an abstraction and competing private interests are left to their own devices. Each NGO becomes a kind of independent fief, struggling with all the others, using the People as pawns, providing them little or nothing, but always claiming that their efforts have kept things from getting worse.

Haiti should be a disturbing lesson for all of us, but strangely, the most obvious lessons are lost on most Americans.

-----------------

lea-p adds links to a Film@11tv documentary "Where did the money go?" to help round out the picture. Four of five episodes are on line now, the fifth and final episode should be posted soon.

Infuriating.



http://filmat11.tv/


Episode One: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qpa8f3Q8eds

Episode Two: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rf-rC3VZxTo

Episode Three: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ldZUqlgoyYQ

Episode Four: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XqUDvoGOkTs

Thursday, January 13, 2011

Speechifying





There were two Big Speeches yesterday, one from Herself, Sarah the Momma Grizzly, and one from His Serenity, the President of the United States of America, LLC, Imperial, Barack Obama, on the matter of the The Shooting in Tucson.

Herself spoke first in a Facebook posting. [Note: This obsession with communicating through Facebook -- whether by Sarah or anyone else -- has long been a curiosity to me. What's up with that? Especially with all the security and privacy issues Facebook has had. And now with Goldman Sachs, the leading looters of the American Economy becoming a prime investor in the Facebook enterprise, one has to question the wisdom of entering Facebook-land for any reason. But that aside...] She denounced and condemned and hurled invective at those who were persecuting her with "blood libel." Jeebus Christmas on a bowling ball, WTF? But there you are. Six people are dead, more than a dozen wounded in a shooting spree in a congressional district "targeted" by Palin unsuccessfully in the election, and the congresswoman who won against Palin's rage is gravely wounded, and all Herself can think of is the dreadful fact that SHE Herself, of all people, is the Real Victim. It was a stunningly self-obsessed turn by the Rightists' favorite, and it did not sit well with much of anyone.

Later, Himself went to Tucson and presented what many interpreted to be a "healing" oration honoring the (real) victims of The Shooting and the (real) heroes of the day, and much to the chagrin of some observers, the crowd of some 24,000 cheered and whooped and hollered at practically everything he said. How inappropos! "This was a solemn occasion," intoned the purse-mouthed Puritans. How dare they express positive emotion! The very idea!

Surprisingly enough, most of the Puritans on this occasion were on the (supposed) "Left." Some of them were -- rightly -- concerned that the occasion would be "Wellstoned", ie: become a Rightist "Bloody Shirt" to wave in condemning Obama and The Left, but that, somewhat strangely, didn't happen except on the fringes of the Right where all things Demon live and flourish.

In fact, much of the Rightist media gave the President's speech a respectful hearing and many Rightist commentators offered at least mild praise for its "tone."

Meanwhile, the frustration over "What To Do" about all these repeated incidents of mass killings by untreated mentally ill shooters -- and others -- continues. There is still an ideological lockdown that makes it difficult or impossible to approach the problem rationally. An ideological lockdown that makes it difficult for many to recognize there is any problem beyond their narrow ideological concerns.

But there is an attempt to break through, and that ultimately may be a sign of hope. I'm not holding my breath, but neither am I in despair.

This is, believe it or not, progress.

Wednesday, January 12, 2011

Doubling Down


As is their wont when on the Firing Line -- so to speak -- the Rightists and their Libertarian and media fellow travelers are doubling down rather than retreat in the face of withering condemnation from The Other Side over their super-heated violent political rhetoric.

Things are about to get a lot more super-heated and hyperbolic. Denunciations and vitriol are only the beginning. We're about to enter a phase in which "Liberals" -- which means anyone in opposition to Rightists on any matter whatsoever, even other Rightists -- are going to become a completely demonized class, not just demonized individuals to be "taken out," but an entire class to be destroyed, utterly.

This is getting close to genocidal territory.

But rather than genocide, there will be acquiescence, submission, and complicity from the "Liberals". To save themselves, they will simply go along with whatever the Rightists want.

As I've said before, no matter the denunciations of Herself or Rush or Beck or any of the other Rightist figures, there is no downside whatsoever to the Right in pushing their current advantage -- and it is an advantage, as it is after every "event" like the one in Tucson -- just as hard and as long as they can.

This is a huge opportunity for them, and they will not let it go to waste.

As for the Demonized Liberal Class, the best response they can come up with is hanky wringing and "Oh dear no!"

The only saving grace is that not all Rightists are monsters, and not all of them want to exterminate all opposition.

They just want to control it!

Tuesday, January 11, 2011

Stochastic terrorism



This article by dKos writer G2geek is getting a lot of coverage or at least exposure, and it seems to fit in with my notion that these routine killing sprees are actually "triggered," in G2geek's view by cultural and media contexts, they are not the accidental outcomes of "lone wolves" or "psychotic nuts" gone inexplicably rogue.

They are "triggered."

G2geek doesn't discount the possibility that the triggering may be intentional, but seems to shy away from it nonetheless. In such a toxic cultural and media environment, one can assume that some people will be triggered to act out their fantasies and kill. One doesn't have to trigger them intentionally; it happens automatically -- and regularly. And yet, if those who do the triggering are aware of their power to set the killers in motion, why not do it intentionally, at particular times and places, if it's possible to do so?

I can understand shying away from the Tinfoil on a topic like this, but often enough the conspiracy you suspect is actually real, or some version of it is.

One of the aspects in Loughner's case that I find very intriguing is that he really does seem to be trying to communicate (in those videos) what is happening to him. All the talk about mind control and how it is being done may not make sense on the surface but if you think about it in the context of Stochastic Terrorism, you start to realize, "OMG! He's trying to tell us!" I think we'll see that with a lot of the other Shooters out there, too. They understand that they are being "driven" by a force or forces completely beyond their control, and in so many cases, they can point to something in the media that has triggered their rage.

I've noticed who's been out defending the "vitriol" and denying that it has anything to do with the creation of these shootings, each of which, of course, is a singular event with no connection to anything else.

It is the entire Republican political establishment. It is the entire Rightist media complex. It is most of the Mainstream Media plex. It is almost all the Libertarian media -- including the "progressive" blogosphere (Jane and Glenn have become especially shrill in defending the vitriol.) And I noticed last night with a kind of horror that Ezra Klein has taken to defending the vitriol too. Though he rattled on at great length, he was not making a coherent argument; he was all over the map, flailing. And when he was confronted, by another commentator, he practically had a meltdown right there on the teevee.

A case can be made that he wasn't actually defending the vitriol, only the freedom to be vitriolic without being blamed for shoot-em-ups, but the case being made for Stochastic Terrorism is that shoot-em-ups are the inevitable consequence of the kind of media vitriol that Americans are soaked in.

I'm reminded of something from years ago. I think most people who read this little corner of Cyberspace know that I live in Sacramento -- when I'm in California! -- and have lived here for quite a while. Most people know that Rush Limbaugh got his major media start here when he was given a regular show on KFBK Radio. It was at the time a very provocative, even shocking show, but not a whole lot different than his national show now. One of the targets for his vitriol was gay people. It was early in the AIDS epidemic, and he railed against gay people day in and day out. All of a sudden, "incidents" started happening. Gay men -- and suspected gay men -- were being attacked all over town, some badly injured, and I believe one was killed. People were horrified. The police were stymied. The mayor, however, recognized that these attacks stemmed from Limbaugh's constant raving against gay people on his radio show, and she called on him publicly to desist. Of course he denied any mal intent -- as he always does -- but he did tell his followers that he never wanted any of them to attack anyone and if any of his followers were involved in the attacks, he wanted them to stop.

Sure enough. They stopped. At least for a while.

In this case, it wasn't "unstable" people who were being influenced to attack targeted outsiders mindlessly. It was pretty ordinary folks exposed to a constant diet of media rage and outrage, with the implication, always, that they had "permission" to act out their rage violently. This is little different than the talk radio influencing, aiding, abetting and enabling the genocide in Rwanda.

At some point, Americans and their media have got to come to grips with the pervasiveness of hatred and rage and gun violence as the "solution" that they purvey and absorb all the time. People ARE triggered to act. And the outcome gets worse and worse.

Sunday, January 9, 2011

A Bit More on "The Shooting"


Jane performs cartwheels to try to explain the Shooter's motivations through analysis of his writings (on the YouTubes) which say to her that he was mentally ill and angry about being expelled from Pima Community College, and so became violent because of that, not for any political reason at all. Just because he shot up a constituent meeting with a congressmember, in the process killing a federal judge and a congressional staffer, it doesn't mean he was acting on any political impulse. When people suffer from untreated schizophrenia, as the Shooter apparently did, they do crazy things. No politics involved at all.

Well, I don't agree with her rather superficial analysis, but I think she has a point nevertheless. As I see it, it's probably less than useful to focus on a political motivation, though it might be worthwhile to understand the overall political melieu.

No, for some time, I've had the sneaky suspicion that these repeated "psychotic break" shootings are potentially not motivated at all. Instead, I see these repeated "shocking" Shootings as "triggered" events, the shooters being effectively acting on someone else's command, without any consciousness of what they're doing.

Manchurian shooters.

Which may be less far fetched than random psychotics who snap.

It would be great to find out, but I have no idea how that might be accomplished.

Nan



I'm quite the fan of Catherine Tate. She's a brilliant comedienne whose characters are absolutely true to life as well as hilarious.

In this sketch, Tate plays Nan, an older woman barely holding on from the grip of dementia. Nan is sarcastic, funny, cruel, sweet, and often impossible, and yet she is beloved both by those in the sketches with her and by the public. She behaves like many older British women who are holding on to their independence in a more and more difficult period of their lives.

She reminds me of my mother. And this sketch is very close to what a partial family get-together at Christmas might have been like 30 years ago or more. At that time, my mother was in her 70's late 60s, my sister in her late 50's 40s, her son in his 20's. My sister was married at the time to her third husband, but he was never entirely accepted by my mother as one of "us." He was an artist rather than an East Indian, but to my mother's eyes, he was just as exotic if not more so.

My mother looked a lot like Nan. She dressed the same way, had the same frizzy hair, sat with her legs apart as Nan does. She behaved erratically, cursed like a sailor, laughed like a banshee. She told tales about those who weren't around, and as Nan does in the sketch, she would attack her own daughter when she left the room, only to smile becomingly when she returned. Her daughter was happy to return the favor.

So, apart from the British accents, this sketch is a little scene out of what might have happened in my own life -- if I had been around for a Christmas get together 30 years ago, but I was not.

My mother was a very unique person, fiercely independent, bright, when she was younger quite beautiful, clever, cruel, deeply distrustful of people in general, an animal lover, and as she got older, quite addled.

I had never encountered anyone quite like her until I read D. H. Lawrence's "Sons and Lovers" and there was a scene in the midlands during which a proud middle-aged woman (character name I can't remember) who essentially has a raging fit. And I thought, well! Isn't that something. Yeah, I recognize that!

I learned later that my mother's grandmother had emigrated from Nottinghamshire in the 1880's. Her ancestors had been Irish and moved to England to escape the Potato Famine. My mother's grandmother had come to America alone. And she made her way in America on her own. Whether she was ever married, I don't know, but she had a daughter, my mother's mother, who instilled a sense of fierceness and independence in her daughter, my mother.

And so we get to Nan.

May the circle be unbroken.



--------------
Just as an aside: My mother was born in 1911 and would be 100 years old this year (she died when she was 74). My father was born in 1901 and would be 110 this year (he died when he was 69).

What's Just Being Called "The Shooting"


[From the Arizona Star]


Yesterday in Tucson, some young fellow with a gun went Medieval on Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and shot her in the head. Then, according to witnesses and news reports, he opened indiscriminate fire on the people who had gathered at the Safeway store to see her and killed a Federal Judge, a little girl, assorted bystanders, and one of Giffords' staffers and injured a dozen more.

Just another shooting in America; they happen every day. Of course, like all the other political shootings in this country, there is now a Big Fight over who -- whether the "Left" or the "Right" -- is responsible, and endless calls for "all sides" to tone down The Rhetoric. It goes this way every time. And the next time it will go this way the next time, too, for it is taken for granted that there will be a Next Time. There always is.

Political shootings and assassinations are as American and Mom's Apple Pie to the horror of most of the rest of the world, but that's the way it has always been in this country. Frustrated Americans, sane or crazy, from time to time take their frustrations out by violently assaulting or assassinating political figures.

And the rhetoric of violence and political assassination is so deeply rooted in the United States, though often denied or sublimated, that it is hard to imagine an America without constant allusions to gun play to satisfy one's anger, frustration or hatred. It's not just political rhetoric that's the problem. Gun play and killing is the foundation rock of so much American entertainment. No one remembers "The Sopranos?" Sure.

[Note: I only saw "The Sopranos" once, during which episode who knows how many poor sods were tortured and killed. I was horrified and disgusted that this television program had become the television program for all with it people to watch and enjoy and discuss endlessly. It was considered such a wonderful metaphor for Our Times, and so very well done. To my way of looking at it, "The Sopranos" was a celebration of violence, murder, torture and gangsterism and a relentless attack on any and all countervailing sense of morality or even common courtesy. It was monstrous. And it was a form of "permission" to those who wanted to behave that way.]

The Government will respond as it always does: retreating further behind its barricades and security apparat and expanding its surveillance of the rest of us. The media will go through its endless routine of "blaming both sides." The public, by and large, will go on as if nothing happened at all.

It's not unlike a scene I saw the other day of a security guard (an off-duty policeman) clubbing and pepper-spraying a citizen before dragging him off to a police substation (?!) in the gas station while the victim's friends (?!) watched placidly or stepped around the violence to retrieve things from the car beside which the beating and pepper spraying were taking place. They were simply too self involved to be concerned with what was happening right in front of them.

So it will be with this shooting.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but one of the things that Nazis did (and it wasn't just them, but it was more common with them) in Germany and especially in conquered territories was the spectacle of the public shaming, public beating, public summary execution or what have you. There were incidents of random summary executions on the street, of accused partisans being beheaded as passers by went about their business, of people being strung up to gallows or tied to posts and whipped or forced to parade around with signs around their necks describing their multitudes of crimes. This was one of the tactics used to frighten ordinary people into submission and compliance. And it worked remarkably well for a remarkably long time. The atrocities weren't just in the camps. They were on constant show in the streets. And people went right on with their business as if nothing was happening. But of course, they had witnessed what could happen to them or anyone if Authority so desired. So they kept their heads down and noses clean so as not to gain the notice of Authority.

That's very much what the American penchant for violence, shootings and assassinations is all about. Inculcating a herd mentality in the majority, while predators run free.

Saturday, January 8, 2011

Greider in The Nation

The End of New Deal Liberalism

Friday, January 7, 2011

After the Revolution Comes -- Again



I broke off yesterday with the topic of Citizens' rights, privileges and responsibilities in and to the New Model America to be created after the revolution comes.

As I put it yesterday:

  • 15) Citizenship includes civil, political, and economic rights and privileges, as well as civil, political and economic responsibilities.


  • Not to put too fine a point on it, but that is a very difficult concept for most Americans -- and especially the Civil Libertarian crowd -- to grasp.

    That there can be categories of rights, that there can be privileges which aren't rights, and that there can be economic as well as civil and political rights is radical thinking in the United States today, as it has been most of our history. That rights and privileges come with responsibilities is even more radical.

    But unless these concepts are accepted and internalized, I see no way past our current level of non-responsive governance by a self-selected Elite/Aristocracy.

  • Civil Rights:

  • Citizens have the right to be secure from search and seizure in their persons and effects by any authority public or private;
  • Citizens have the right to speak and write and otherwise express themselves as they see fit subject to limitation only on the basis of libel, slander, public disturbance, and falsely causing panic;
  • Citizens have the right to worship the Divine -- or not worship -- as they see fit and proper. Citizens' right to worship -- or not worship -- shall only be restricted to the extent one's rights interferes with another's;
  • Citizens have the right to travel freely within the borders of the Regions and between them. No internal passports shall be required. Travel outside the Nation shall not be unduly restricted, nor shall onerous requirements be imposed on either exiting or returning to the nation;
  • Citizens have the right to fair and impartial justice under the law;
  • Citizens have the right to vote by secret ballot in free and fair elections for local, regional, and national representatives;
  • Citizens have the right to be treated with dignity and respect at all times by the state and its authorized agents;
  • Citizens have the right to contest any charges against them;
  • Citizens have the right to legal representation in any action brought by civil or criminal authorities and in any private dispute between parties;
  • Citizens have the right to protest, the right to petition, and the right to seek redress of grievance from the state and/or its authorized agents;
  • Citizens have the right to organize in concert with other citizens for any lawful purpose;
  • Citizens have the right to an education, to decent and safe housing, to health care, and to gainful employment and to a dignified retirement.


  • Privileges include honors for achievement, financial and other rewards for innovation and development, and distinctions awarded for outstanding wisdom.

    Responsibilities include the responsibility to vote in elections, the responsibility to learn, to follow the law, to care for one's self and one's family, to contribute to the economic well being of the society as a whole, to respect one another, and to be involved in local and regional public affairs.

    We could certainly add to this far from comprehensive list.

    These kinds of rights, privileges and responsibilities are the sorts of things that make civil (and other) Libertarians cringe and pull their hair out, for the simple reason that in the system that I'm proposing, economic, political and social predators are not protected as they are in the current system.

    Once you take away protection for systemic predators, what seems impossible now becomes far more possible. It's a truly radical, indeed Revolutionary, approach to problem solving and mutual development.

    So long as predators are protected by the Constitution, by custom, and by statute, so long will we be mired in misery.
  • Thursday, January 6, 2011

    After the Revolution Comes



    Everyone knows that the Marketing Department of the Sirius Cybernetics Corporation will be first against the wall after the Revolution Comes.

    But once they're dealt with, it might be useful to have some sort of Program or Plan of what to do to correct the lurching, faltering juggernaut that the United States has become. It's either that or civil war. Of course our Enemies, foreign and domestic, would dearly love to see the USA consume itself in yet another futile civil war. More for them, eh?

    Well. Certain things do need to happen after the Revolution, and I've put together a few ideas of wither we should go as a nation after the American constitutional republic and the imperial security state that has replaced it have fallen once and for all.

    First concept is that a self-governing constitutional republic is structurally and functionally a Good Thing -- so long as its make-up and operations are not graven in stone or on Golden Plates requiring High Priests and the Urim and Thummim to interpret. Making a secular religion and fetish of the Constitution is what got us in this mess in the first place. We must never return to that situation.

    What should we do, then?

  • 1) Abolish the States. That's key. Our corrupted and decadent Constitutional system is based on the unification of the several "sovereign states" to form a Nation. All well and good, except that the "sovereign states" aren't sovereign, and the states themselves are a mishmash of political convenience and historical greed, colonial outpost and imperial expansion that make no rational sense at all. Get rid of them.

    Hawaii should be restored to independence; Alaska, most probably, should be given to Canada or Russia -- or be granted its own independence. Why not? It should be capable of self-sustenance.

    As for the Lower 48, all the states should be abolished. They should be replaced with nine or ten Autonomous Regions, independent of one another and the national government for most domestic purposes. The Regions should be established so far as possible on an equal footing -- which of course is more ideal than practical at least at first -- based on geographically contiguous, demographically diverse, and economically self-sufficient areas of more or less equal population. Thus no particular Region should have an intrinsic advantage over any other, though as I say, at first that is a difficult goal to achieve. Eventually, however, the concept of Autonomous Regions can flourish as an egalitarian ideal and a practical reality so long as no Region is ever allowed to dominate any of the others or the national government.

  • 2) Abolish the Senate. This should be self evident; once the States are gone, there is no reason for a Senate. On the other hand, a National Council made up of Regional Councilors can serve something of the honorific -- if not the governing -- function of a Senate. Most governing systems do have an Upper House, but in many cases, they function like the British House of Lords, purely for decorative and/or honorific purposes, and if government and the People, as reconceived, need such an honorific body, then fine. Have one. Just don't give it any governing authority.

  • 3) Double, triple, or even quadruple the size of the House of Representatives. My preference is that the Larger the Better. The problem that we have now is that representation at the national level doesn't include The People, and it doesn't in part because the sheer enormity of the constituencies of House members' districts. Rather than represent the People under such circumstances, it is much easier -- and customary -- to represent the interests of "clients." Those who pay, in other words, and ultimately, those who Own. Expanding the size of the House of Representatives is the first step toward correcting that imbalance. And immediate follow on has to correct the electoral system and how it is funded.

  • 4) Abolish and reconstitute the Law and Justice system. This is a really fundamental objective. Law and Justice has rarely been well-handled in this country, despite all the rhetoric to the contrary, and as the nation has devolved into Empire, the capability of the System to administer "equal justice under the law" has simply vanished altogether. The entire system needs to be remade from the ground up. The need is on par with that of France after the Revolution, and there are worse models than the Code Napoleon to follow in remaking our own Law and Justice system. An interim system, while the practical aspects of the reconstituted system are worked out, would have to be instituted, and as horrible as it is to contemplate, the interim might well be that of the military justice system, conducted by military JAG officers. It's by no means perfect, but it is worlds better -- when it comes to Justice as an absolute -- than what is presently in place, and providing justice temporarily through a military system can have a number of benefits: 1) it might re-integrate the military into civil society again; 2) it can serve to occupy military interest in something other than aggressive war and conquest overseas.

  • 5) Reconceive the nature and purpose of Corporations. Corporations are not persons and they do not have civil rights. They are special purpose constructs meant for specific ends, they exist and persist solely and completely at the will of the People through their representatives in Council and Congress Assembled, and they are granted specific privileges and protections by Revocable Charter. Corporate misdeed and wrong doing is punishable by extinguishment and forfeiture; corporate officers are responsible severally and jointly for unlawful and criminal acts.

  • 6) Autonomous Regions are governed by elected Regional Councils. Each Councilperson shall have a constituency of no more than 15,000 persons in order to ensure that Regional Councils are as closely representative of the People as possible. Regional Councils have the authority to legislate most Regional domestic matters as they see fit, so long as the National Rights and Responsibilities as declared in the national constitution are followed. Relationships between Regions are governed by National law, but within Regions, autonomy is maintained.

  • 7) Regional Councils send Representatives to the National Council, how many from each region to be determined, 5 to 10 being most likely. These Representatives may or may not be members of the Regional Councils that send them, and they are appointed by committees of the Councils. (Remember, the National Council is an honorific body, not a legislative body.)

  • 8) There is a popularly elected head of state, analogous to the President, who, like a constitutional monarch "reigns but does not rule." The Head of State has no legislative or executive authority. The Head of State represents the Nation in world affairs and is under the authority of the House of Representatives.

  • 9) The House of Representatives elects from its membership the Head of Government. As in a Parliamentary system, the Head of Government is analogous to the Prime Minister. The majority party is generally responsible for the selection and election of the Head of Government, but due to the multi-party nature of the regional and national political system, coalition candidates are inevitable.

  • 10) Both the Democratic and the Republican Parties are abolished and quite likely both will be subject to prosecution as criminal conspiracies.

  • 11) Parties and factions to represent the interests of the People are encouraged with few restrictions, but election funding is entirely from the public purse. Private contributions to candidates for election are forbidden. This restriction may be modified in time, but until the overwhelming amounts of corrupt election funding -- ie: purchasing candidates -- is removed from the process, private contributions to candidates must be unlawful. Every certified candidate for election shall receive the same funding level from the public purse.

  • 12) Media shall be required to present candidates on air and in print a certain number of times each election cycle at no charge.

  • 13) The National Armed Forces shall be made up of volunteers and draftees from recruited and provided by the Autonomous Regions based on the need for defensive forces rationally determined. Aggressive war is forbidden, Empire and Imperial conquest forsworn.

  • 14) Citizenship shall be determined by the Autonomous Regions, based on certain national principles: there shall be no religious, racial, gender or economic status discrimination in determining citizenship, nor shall immigration or justice status of parents deny citizenship to offspring. The process of immigration and emigration shall be streamlined and rationalized on a national basis, but the basis for granting or denying citizenship to immigrants will be up to the Autonomous Regions to determine. Citizens of one Autonomous Region are by definition National citizens and thus are granted all rights and privileges of citizenship in each Autonomous Region.

  • 15) Citizenship includes civil, political, and economic rights and privileges, as well as civil, political and economic responsibilities.

    [break!] To be continued....
  • Wednesday, January 5, 2011

    El Encanto



    I did a quick websearch on Restaurants on San Gabriel Canyon Road the other day when I was writing about the house where I lived in LA County from 1954 to 1959. I mentioned that from time to time, we would go out to dinner at a "roadhouse" in the mountains above Azusa. I didn't remember its name, but "El Encanto" is what came up, and that sounded right. From what little I found about it online in that search, it was apparently closed and had been for quite some time. But from Google Mapping, the building was apparently still there.

    Today, I did another search, and I found out what happened, or at least what is happening now. It is a remarkable story.

    The picture above is indeed of the entrance to the restaurant I remember. It has changed little in 50 years or more. The restaurant closed, it is said, in 2003 or 2004 after many years' operations -- well over 50 -- and the property sat vacant. It was purchased in 2006 by the Watershed Conservation Authority for inclusion in the Azusa River Wilderness Park.

    A Master Plan [warning: 253 page PDF; do not open if you don't want to download the whole thing!] for re-use of the property was completed in 2007, and it is really quite a wonderful plan for an urban wilderness park along the San Gabriel River, incorporating the former restaurant as a park headquarters.

    The Master Plan itself has not yet been implemented as the Watershed Conservation Authority has continued to acquire adjacent properties to combine with the El Encanto property in order to create an 80-100 acre wilderness park. Apparently last year they achieved their land-holding goals and one might imagine that they would begin implementation of the Plan sometime this year. Well, they would if California weren't on the verge of bankruptcy.

    The restaurant I remember was certainly the fanciest place we ever went to eat out. We weren't poor, but we lived as if we were, and going out to eat at all was a fairly rare occurrence. When we did, we usually went to places like the lunch counters at Woolworth's or Grant's, or sometimes, when we were really feeling de luxe, we went to Bob's Big Boy. Very, very occasionally, we'd go to someplace "in town" -- ie: in Los Angeles or surrounding areas.

    El Encanto was a surprisingly frequent destination given the infrequency we usually went out at all. I would guess, looking back, we must have gone there eight or ten times in the five years we lived in that part of California.

    The drive up to El Encanto was certainly exciting, passing as we did through the (then) little, mostly agricultural towns along the way. There were orange groves and orchards and palm trees all along the route. The orange groves were protected from frost by smudge pots, oil burning heaters that were lit whenever the temperature was expected to drop. They made a powerful stink and of course contributed to the smog which was really bad in the area at the time. There is still a smog problem in the area, but it is nothing like what it was in the mid-50's.

    El Encanto wasn't very far up the San Gabriel Canyon Road, but it was completely cut off from the urban/suburban area below. It was beside the San Gabriel River against a steep rise in the mountain. The San Gabriels, like many of the mountains surrounding and in the Los Angeles Basin, rise abruptly from the plain with no real foothills for transition. One gets on the canyon road and the climb is steep.

    Once you got to the restaurant, you were really in a different world. How fancy was El Encanto? Well, there was a maitre d' who sat you at a white linen covered table, either in one of the glass walled rooms or, if the weather was good and you requested it, outside on the patio. You were served by a uniformed waiter who was as solicitous as any I've seen anywhere. You were brought a relish tray and bread with your huge, leather covered menus, and of course, you were offered cocktails -- even I was. Non-alcoholic drinks were brought for me; the adults, I recall, liked their vodka gimlets.

    The rooms were dark, the tables lit by candles; there were strings of colored lights criss-crossing the ceilings and outdoors. There was a bar, if I recall correctly, near the entrance, and it had colorful neon lighting. Overall, the place was quite large, but it was also very quiet. The floor was carpeted and the tables were far enough apart for privacy. There was sometimes "cocktail music" played by a live band somewhere in the place, but I don't remember ever seeing musicians.

    The place smelled of grilled meat, and it was the steaks that drew the clientele. Steaks and baked potatoes and huge iceberg-lettuce salads. The food was good.

    At the time, I wasn't much of a beef-eater, though I would have a hamburger now and again. I can only recall ordering a child's portion of steak once, and while it was all right, I preferred other items on the menu. Sometimes I was content with just a baked potato, bread and the relish tray. Simple pleasures.

    I really looked forward to going there, enjoying the service and exotic locale, enjoying the food and the adventure of getting there, the beauty of the site on arrival.

    In addition to the grilled meat smell of the restaurant itself, there was a very bracing fresh river/forest smell outdoors as well. The view of the river along the edge of the parking lot was really captivating. The whole area was beautiful. And that helped make the restaurant unique. On the drive back home after dark, the lights of practically the whole LA Basin were spread out in front of you as you rounded a corner on the canyon road. The sight was spectacular, as anyone who has seen it from any vantage point above LA can testify.

    I really hope that as the site is transformed into a wilderness park, the special nature of the restaurant building will be preserved and that -- who knows -- maybe in the future, on a smaller scale, a new version of the old El Encanto will reopen. I can easily imagine that a new generation -- the grandchildren of my generation -- would enjoy it.

    ---------------------------

    UPDATE: Not that it's at all important, but I've been puzzling over a couple of partial memories I have of eating at El Encanto when time was.

    One is that I recall the sign being neon, with a dark background, not the plastic-covered fluorescent sign in the picture above. I seem to recall the bzzzzing sound of the transformer and the smell of ozone when passing by, but I'm not sure of the memory because I've been around a lot of neon signs since then, and they all bzzzz and smell of ozone. So I could be recalling something else.

    Second, after I wrote the piece on El Encanto, I had some very strong recollections of eating shrimp cocktail there. This gets a bit dicey because there is another "meat" restaurant up the coast that I frequented as a young adult that served small shrimp cocktails as part of the meal, prior to bringing on the meat. But I was recalling large shrimp arranged in a circle around cocktail sauce in a bowl set in a goblet of ice, which is not the way it was served at the restaurant up the coast, and I can't recall any other place I might have had shrimp cocktail the way I remember it (or think I remember it) at El Encanto.

    I only bring this up because it illustrates what happens to memories -- even seemingly crystal clear ones -- over time. They become a mashup of so many things, and what you think you recall with such certainty may or may not be at all what happened -- or how it happened.

    4th Grade



    In keeping with the nostalgia theme, I thought I'd write a little bit about an incident I was involved in in the 4th grade.

    I believe that in California public schools it is still required to teach "California History" in the 4th grade. I actually have a couple of 4th Grade California History textbooks from the late 50's and the early 60's, and they are, to say the least, rather sanitized pictures of what went on during the several phases of California history up to then. Sanitized? Well, "cleansed" I think is the better term. Cleansed of any hint of Unpleasantness.

    Part of our 4th Grade historical experience in my day was a visit to one of the Spanish Missions that were established along El Camino Real starting in San Diego in 1769. The closest mission to my school was San Gabriel, and dutifully, my 4th Grade class bussed off one day to see it.



    I thought it was fascinating.

    All my life, I've rather liked things old an musty and somewhat crumbling around the edges, and in the mid 1950's San Gabriel Mission, though still an active parish church and long a destination for area tourists and school children, was still in a not-quite-fully-restored state, and I liked it for that.

    We toured it, heard the story of how the kindly padres ministered to the cheerful, willing Indians, how they raised cattle and grapes and lived their lives in peace and harmony, and then we went back to the school where teams of students were assigned to work on models of California Missions for display on History Day. It was all quite wonderful.

    During the period that we were creating our models of missions, another boy and I were playing a fantasy game in the corner of the school yard, something we would do during most recesses. We were making up and acting out a kind of fantasy of California's past, based on what we were learning in class and what we were seeing on TV of what Used To Be -- remember the Cisco Kid and The Lone Ranger? -- and one day, we were playing our game after a grader had been over the school yard in the corner where we usually went, and I noticed what looked like a large rock poking out of the ground. I went and pulled it out and saw that it was a long, cylindrical piece of granite or some such stone with tapered ends. My friend said, "Somebody made that." It looked to have been made, indeed. And the rock, whatever it was, wasn't something commonly found in the area.

    Moments later, I came across another rock which I dug out of the ground and discovered it was thin and flat and that the cylindrical rock fit its width. My friend said, "That's Indian stuff."



    Hm. So we took the items to class and showed them off. The teacher was amazed and wanted to know where we'd found them. We took her to the spot and showed her how I'd dug them out of the ground. She, then, called the anthropology department at Cal Poly, and they sent out some researchers who did some gridding and digging in the schoolyard over a period of weeks. The class would assemble from time to time at the dig site -- which was rather heavily featured in local newspapers for a time -- and we would hear about what was going on.



    Ultimately, one of the researchers came to our class and explained that they believed the site was that of a Gabrielino Indian village, probably dating from the latter 1700's though it may have been established well before San Gabriel Mission. They had found arrowheads, bits of crockery, some unidentified wooden objects, and the outlines of two brush shelters used by the Indians. They said it was not a camp but was, so far as they could tell, a more or less permanent village under the influence and guidance of the Mission, but more or less independent. The residents had a pretty good source of food nearby in the oak forests, game was available, and crops could be grown; they had at least intermittent water from the stream (that had been concreted and turned into a drainage ditch in recent times) and in good times, it was probably a very pleasant place to live.



    Artifacts were taken away, the site was graded over again, and lawn was eventually planted in the schoolyard.

    I got to thinking about the kind of life these Indians must have lived, and how strange it was that outsiders -- whether Spanish or Mexicans or Americans -- could simply wipe away their village and the Indians that lived there and pretend as if they never existed, how they could casually plant orange groves over the remnants of the former village, then casually rip out the groves to replace them with houses and schools, where I, a simple 4th grader, could accidentally stumble across what little still remained of the Indian village, and scholars could come to study the site for a few weeks, only to cover it all over again and plant lawn over the remains. How transitory everything is.

    It was a startling revelation to me. One that I have never forgotten.

    Tuesday, January 4, 2011

    Cadillac Desert -- the Story of William Mulholland and the Making of Los Angeles



    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hkbebOhnCjA&feature=BF&list=PLE7C2A70A8FB767D3&index=1

    This is the Real Story behind Robert Towne's brilliant 1974 picture, "Chinatown."

    There are nine parts on YouTube, from a 1997 VHS videotape that's not in very good condition, but if you put up with the glitches and watch it all, you'll gain some knowledge about Los Angeles as it was and is, and from that it becomes possible to understand something of why so much of what is seems so far out of whack.

    The "Chinatown" syndrome is not the only explanation for the vicissitudes we're facing, but it is a key to understanding.

    Monday, January 3, 2011

    A Bit of Nostalgia



    The picture is of the house where I lived as a child from 1954 to 1959 in Los Angeles County. I was idly Google mapping one day, decided to plug in the address -- which I have never forgotten -- and there it was, behold.

    It was a three bedroom, one bath house, with a living room, dining room, entry hall, and a kitchen with an eating area and a space for a washing machine. The garage did not connect directly with the house. There was a small patio out the back, and a trash incinerator in the back yard. We built a little pond in back and for a time, hosted a multitude of frogs and a tortoise we called Myrtle. Those who remember Duck and Cover know who Myrtle the Turtle was. Myrtle eventually moved on.

    At the time it was built, this house was the last one on the block; beyond it to the east was a scrubby field and then a rather high hill, a steep climb into an oak covered wilderness. There was a small lake or pond about half-way up the hill, the water was pretty yucky. There were tires and other bits of flotsam in the water, and some sort of black sludge around the perimeter. One ordinarily didn't choose to swim in the water or get oneself wet with it. I remember building a raft out of scrap lumber up there with some friends though. We launched it, me and another boy on it, and of course it sank promptly.

    But the oaks made for an excellent forest environment, and once you got to the top of the hill, the view was breathtaking. To the north were the San Gabriel Mountains and Old Baldy; at their foot and to the east was Pomona. Stretching out directly north was the flatlands leading to Azusa. At first at least, these flatlands were mostly covered with orange groves. In fact, there were orange groves directly behind our house across the concrete drainage ditch. There was a large picture window in the living room at the back of the house, and on clear days -- which unfortunately weren't too frequent -- the mountains made a stunning backdrop for the orange groves.

    No, the air was not very clear very often. Even then, stinging smog was the rule, especially the farther east of Downtown LA you were. And then there were the fires. Every year, the slopes of the San Gabriels would catch fire, and the smoke and ash would fill the air for days at a time. One time -- but just once -- the hill mentioned earlier caught fire, and everyone in the neighborhood was panicking about it. We were pretty far out from civic services, and people were terrified that the fire department wouldn't come before the fire got to the houses, but in fact, they did come and put the fire out very quickly.

    I'm really surprised at how little has changed at this house. It is still the same pale yellow color it was when I lived there. The trim is still painted white. It still has the same blacktop asphalt driveway. The roses appear to be gone from the property line on the left, but the shrubbery in front of the porch is the same. The kitchen was extended onto the porch -- which appears to be the only physical change to the exterior. There is what appears to be a patio on the left side which wasn't there when I lived there, and the chain-link fence appears to have been replaced with a wooden one. The shrubs around the garage are the same. The oak tree by the street is actually one I planted more than fifty years ago. I brought a seedling down from the hillside one day and put it in a hole I dug in the lawn. I didn't think it would last, but it did until we moved away, and now to see it so much larger is quite a surprise.

    When I lived there, there were no sewers in the neighborhood, and there were no curbs or gutters on the street. At first, there were cesspools in front of every house for waste. Then they were replaced with septic tanks. It's actually hard to imagine that an entire suburban neighborhood would have been built without sewers even in those days, but so it was. There was a kind of ditch on either side of the street where the rainwater was supposed to run, but we often faced street flooding even though the street ran downhill.

    The drainage ditch in back was a concreted version of the little streamlet that ran down from the hill. It was mostly dry most of the time, of course, but sometimes, after a heavy rain, there would be a lot of water flow, and one time, foolish child that I was, I climbed over our back fence to have a closer look. Naturally, I fell in. Oh. What fun. I was swept downstream quite a ways, but luckily I found some debris to hold on to and managed to work my way out of the water and crawl back up the steep concrete slope to the ledge that ran along the backside of neighbors' fences and eventually made my way back to my own house, where, of course, I didn't tell anyone what had happened. These ditches are everywhere in Los Angeles, and children -- and others -- fall into them all the time. It's quite a wonder that so many survive.

    The orange groves behind our house were ripped out within a year of our moving in. It was sad. Very sad. They pulled up the trees, bulldozed them into a pile and burned them. To the left -- or west -- of our property line, new houses were built. We called them "cracker boxes" because they were low or flat-roofed and they were built on concrete slabs rather than raised foundations. They sold for somewhat less than our house cost, too. To the right -- or east -- of our property line, a new elementary school was built. The following school year, I would be among the first 3rd grade students to attend. [Strangely, I have absolutely no memory of where I attended 1st or 2nd grade. But I do remember kindergarten in Santa Maria quite clearly. Hm.]

    A little later on, I would climb the hill mentioned earlier (I don't think it had a name, though there were named hills in the area) and watch the freeway being graded and built to Pomona. It is now Interstate 10, the San Bernardino Freeway, but the only name I knew it by then was "the Freeway." A little later, I could climb the hill and watch one of those new shopping centers being built, I think it was called Eastland.

    There was a small grocery store on the main street fairly near our house, but there were no supermarkets, no "town shopping" nearby. In fact, when my mother wanted to go shopping, we did it in Downtown Los Angeles, perhaps twenty miles west. It's remarkable to think how far out in the country we really were. It's certainly not that way now. When Eastland opened there was jubilation for miles around. Finally, some nearby major stores! May Company! Think of it!

    On occasion, we'd drive up into the mountains and have dinner at a road house that is apparently still there (although if my websearch is correct, it's been closed for years). I didn't remember its name, but when I did a websearch, "El Encanto" came up, and I think that's what it was called. It was dark and smoky and dripped with neon and strings of colored lights and excitement. I would have hamburger, but the adults would have steak. That was its draw, the meat and the location in the San Gabriel Canyon.

    Just a handful of memories; there are many more, but this will have to do for now.

    Sunday, January 2, 2011

    Concepts



    I used to joke that mine was the last generation to actually be "educated" in public school. In California, radical changes in the nature and purpose of public education began in 1967 with the Governorship of Ronald Reagan, the point being to make it impossible for students to rise up ever again.

    It seemed fairly clear early on that the objective was to eliminate the teaching of -- and thus knowledge of -- critical thinking. Given the nature of the student uprisings of the '60's, based as they were on the realization that much of what were were being told was lies, a realization driven by the widespread ability to think critically, eliminating that ability understandably became a prime objective.

    Today, it seems the very idea of critical thinking is unknown to almost anyone under 60.

    Not only that, but there is a nearly universal misperception of the difference between speculation and fact.

    There seems to be little or no knowledge of how to evaluate information; it is all a jumble that one sorts through based entirely on principles of Authority: who says the thing determines its factual truth.

    During December, for example, an immense amount of "news" -- and hysteria -- was generated over the curious case of Julian Assange and what he might or might not have done to get himself in trouble with the Law. It was widely purported that the accusations against him in Sweden for those "sex crimes" were a set up by the CIA to entrap him so as to make his extradition to the USA for trial on any number of Espionage and other charges possible.

    Charlie Savage's December 15 report in the New York Times laid the groundwork for much of the hysteria over what the Department of Justice was doing to build a case against Assange. His reporting was taken as gospel, fact, indisputable, partly because Charlie Savage is a widely trusted Authority, and partly because it was in the New York Times, which -- of course -- is Assange's Media Partner in the United States (except for their spat over the John Burns profile, of course.)

    But if you read the article critically, there are no named sources, there is no support for the assertions made by Savage regarding what the Justice Department is or is not doing except for very vague statements and "authorizations" by AG Eric Holder, there is no factual evidence of any grand jury proceeding, and there is extensive speculation about what the DoJ "could be doing."

    In other words, the entire piece, which has been taken uncritically as "fact," has very few facts in it, whereas it is filled with speculation, unsupported assertion, quotes from named and unnamed interested parties, and suspected future potentials.

    Perhaps it's not an entirely useless story, but it doesn't tell you what is really going on -- because it can't.

    All it does is keep a pot stirred -- and likely is a conduit for propaganda. It is the New York Times after all.

    But people who don't understand critical thinking cannot look at a story like this that way. They look at who wrote it, they look at where it was published, they look at what is being said. As long as those things fit with their perceptions of "truth", the story is "true" and "factual."

    Yes, it's factually speculative. Beyond that? Nothing.

    Except that it made the Assange defense go into hyperdrive -- for fear, apparently, that Assange was going to be rounded up and put on trial in the US for Evility -- or something.

    That fear and chaos and panic is useful for someone. But who?

    Friday, December 31, 2010

    Year-End Doom Blogging



    Let the Hanky Wringing and "Oh, dear, noes!" continue. Things are going to get worse for the vast majority of Americans in 2011, there's no two ways about it. The question, as always, is what -- if anything -- Americans will do about it but take to their fainting couch and have another Take and Bake while watching the Game on their Big Screen.

    As a rule, I'm not into Doom Blogging, one of the most popular genres in the field. The Aga Saga Woman can make me laugh uproariously when she goes off on one of her panics:

    "Run for your lives, Children! We're all going to diiiiiiiiie!!!


    And we see Doom Blogging everywhere; it was especially prevalent during the BP Gulf Oil Blowout, when it was just accepted as common knowledge that the Gulf was "dead" and could not be restored; there was no point in even considering an alternative.

    Now that the Batshit Republicans are about to be restored to power in the House of Representatives, it is widely understood that we're doomed as a nation, as a people, as a self-governing society. That's as may be, but if it is true, the proximate cause of our doom is not the Restoration of the Batshit Party to to power in the House of Representatives. It's been in the cards for quite a while, in other words, and all the political factions have had a role to play.

    Yet there is a sense of palpable dread that has been a-building relentlessly since the Impeachment Circus of 1998 and following. That's when the notion of Self-Government in the United States went off the rails, and it has never been restored. Without that mooring of promise and responsibility, the notion that at least some of us are doomed has a growing resonance.

    The Impeachment Circus was followed by the casual, lawless intervention of the Supreme Court to install the Court majority's favorite on the White House Throne. This was recognized at the time as a serious breach of Constitutional authority by the Court, and yet, all the Powers That Be acceded to it. Those who were paying attention knew that the lawless installation of George Bush the Lesser and the submission of the entire Ruling Class to this usurpation would not work out well, and most were sure that it would lead to unprecedented levels of corruption, looting, and aggressive war. Sure enough. That's exactly what happened. But it happened on a scale and speed that surprised even the most gloomy doom-sayer at the time.

    Now it almost seems as if Doom has been delayed. Repeatedly. And when Doom is delayed so often, one's expectations of Immanent Doom grow greater and greater.

    The transition of Congressional power next year will have an influence on everyone's sense of well-being, and because the White House is not about to move off its Hooverite "Progressivism", most people's sense of well-being will go into a further tailspin. On the other hand, it wouldn't have been any better for most people if Democrats had stayed in charge of the House.

    The question will be just how bad it will get.

    As I've said before, we're likely to see the complete paralysis of regular government function and the substitution of something else again, which most people will welcome as better than what was going on before. In the Koch series, I suggest that we are already living in their future, with the semblance of institutions still functioning, but they don't actually work, and real rule occurring well behind the scenes involving a shrinking cadre of Owners and Stakeholders. But next year, I suspect, what's still somewhat hidden will come out of the shadows, and we will see clearly, perhaps for the first time, that Our Rulers simply have no interest in We the People, and do not intend to gain an interest.

    What Americans ever do about it is anyone's guess. The only crypto-Revolutionary movement this country has seen in decades are the TeaBaggers, and they are going to be in power. So... if things get worse on their watch? They'll double down, of course. It's what they do.

    For those who haven't seen it, I recommend (Astro)Turf Wars for an idea of who the TeaBaggers are and who runs them -- and what the intent is.

    I recommend The Century of the Self to understand how Americans are so easily hoodwinked.

    Tuesday, December 28, 2010

    What the New Year Holds




    This is apparently what The Powers That Be want us to endure next year: the Pauls, Father and Son, holding forth endlessly, and bringing the operations of the Government to a grinding halt while they propound about the Constitution As It's Supposed to Be (cf: the Confederate Constitution) and the Universe twirls around them, first around the one and then around the other.

    I put the Son before the Father (sacrilege, I know) for the simple reason that he will be seated as a Senator from Kentucky, and as a Senator, individually, he will have essentially unlimited power to bring the body to a screeching halt. This is a power all Senators have, but only Republicans are allowed to exercise it according to the rules and ancient traditions of the body. The Father cannot single-handedly bring the House to a halt, but he will no doubt do his best, and likely will achieve his objective by strategy -- a strategy of burying the House in investigatory fervor, everything being "wrong" and all. Since 1787. So it all has to be "reviewed."

    Why The Powers That Be would want this is something of a Mystery, but clearly they do, and no doubt while the Government is completely paralyzed, they will set in motion their Final Solution. The outlines have been obvious for years. They don't believe in Constitutional Self-Government and they want to replace it with something more like a "Directed Democracy" in which the constitutional forms of the past are retained in large part, but they are non-functional. Instead, Rule is achieved through and from what amounts to the Throne, which is not so much an independent executive as it is the agent of the Ruling Faction of Private Interest. The People, essentially, have no say in the matter, nor are they even expected to know what's going on. The Government is to exist as the enforcement arm of the Ruling Faction of Private Interest, nothing more. The heady days of "self-government" will be well and truly over.

    A dictatorship? Well, it could be, especially if the Pauls, Father and Son, are able to completely paralyze the functioning of Government. There will have to be a sharp -- and quite possibly final -- intervention from... somewhere... which will have the effect of irrelevating Congress altogether. If Obama can't engineer it and implement it appropriately, I have little doubt he will be replaced, and not with Joe Biden. The most likely replacement would be General St. David Petraeus who would step in as a kind of Interim Protector, the Presidency and Vice Presidency being temporarily vacant.

    That role could easily become permanent.

    It's already quite clear that internal factional disputes within the Ruling Class have reached critical mass. There will be a fierce and potentially violent struggle between factions for ultimate control, a struggle that will make the internal factional disputes of the Clintonian Interregnum seem almost quaint. How it will resolve is difficult to tell. But whatever the result, the New America that emerges will look little like what we once knew, its path will be set in a different direction, and just like today, many around the world will follow.

    Whatever the case, it is not our struggle.

    [Note: I am recovering from pneumonia. I refused hospitalization -- for the simple reason that the last time I was hospitalized I was nearly killed (twice) through medical error and neglect. Recovery will be long and slow at home, but it wouldn't have been any faster in the hospital...]