at a post-election wrap-up session, when a fellow panelist "mentioned that bloggers had had a big impact on the reporting on Election Day, Williams waved that point away by quipping that the self-styled journalists are 'on an equal footing with someone in a bathroom with a modem.'"

-- Brian Williams (Via InstaPundit.)

someone in a bathroom with a modem ?!?

They're really asking for it, aren't they?

What an odd coincidence!

I was just discussing fashion with Sean Kinsell, (in comments to an earlier post), then nearly fainted when I saw this:

Not only does Moore have a new look, he's got new lines to go with his new garb:

Moore appeared on stage wearing a suit and tie, no beard or hat and a trim haircut.

When asked by Jay Leno about his appearance, Moore quipped, "I thought I should look a little sharper for my IRS audit" and "If you can't beat them, you might as well look like them."

Moore told Leno that there was a reason President Bush was re-elected November 2, "He got more votes."

"The Republicans - I'll give them this - they had a story to tell," Moore continued. "The Democrats, often times, aren't very good at telling a story. And the [Bush] story was: Out of the ashes of Sept. 11 rose one man. And he stood on the rubble of lower Manhattan with a bullhorn and he said, 'I will protect you.' "

Moore had some advice for Democrats who were unhappy with the results of the 2004 presidential election. "[Bush's victory] was just a couple of percentage points," Moore told the "Tonight Show" audience. "People who voted for Kerry shouldn't be depressed at this point. They should pick themselves up . . . There's another game in four years. And we'll come back and do the best we can."

You'd almost think there was an election or something.

UPDATE (BUT AN EXPLANATION IS NOT AN EXCUSE): I guess one good picture deserves another.

Sigh.

(Via Glenn Reynolds.)

After reading this account of Ivory Coast atrocities linked by Glenn Reynolds, I began to wonder whether there might be other atrocities which haven't managed to find their way into the MSM.

What I want to know is: did French troops behead demonstrators in the Ivory Coast?

The news seems to be disappearing as fast as it appears, so I'll provide the link to the Google cache of the story I found (with another version here):

IVORY COAST LEADER CLAIMS FRENCH TROOPS DECAPITATED DEMONSTRATORS
Received Saturday, 20 November 2004 22:16:00 GMT

PARIS, Nov 20 (AFP) - Ivory Coast leader Laurent Gbagbo said Saturday he believed reports were true that French troops had decapitated local demonstrators during anti-French riots in the west African state this month.

"I wasn't in the hospitals myself but everyone who went there said so: you may take it that the evidence provided by several people is true," he responded online from Abidjan to a website discussion in Paris.

Asked by AFP, French army information services in Paris would say only: "We have no comment to make on this kind of statement."

Cardinal Bernard Agre, Roman Catholic Archbishop of Abidjan, first made the decapitation charge, saying November 11 on Radio Vatican: "I have just come from the hospitals. It's unbearable, these young people decapitated by the French army."

[BBC on French denial here.]

I don't know quite what to make of it, but surely such grotesque allegations of prisoner abuse -- by an Archbishop, to the Vatican -- will be investigated by the International Red Cross . . . (Commenters at this anti-French blog are suggesting that someone should call the UN as well.)

MORE: There's an atrocity video here apparently showing that heads were shot off, not cut off:

....the French are making the point that no one had their head intentionally lopped off… like with a sword. Apparently it doesn’t count as a beheading if it is a bullet that releives you of it.

UPDATE: That last video was pretty tough to watch. It's quite obvious that a number of civilians were shot to death by French soldiers; I lost count of the number of dead and dying women. The headless corpse is pretty gruesome too, so if you download the (long) video, consider yourself warned.

But why isn't it being widely reported? Because it's French soldiers shooting civilians in the Ivory Coast? Had Israelis or Americans been involved in anything remotely like this, there'd have been front page headlines all over the world.

Though Kofi Annan is still safe in the public eye and still the image of all that is pure and holy in the old press, times they may be a changin'. Political cartoons these days tend to be hacky, easy, and a bit behind, so Jerry Holbert's cartoon from today's Boston Herald is encouraging (via Yahoo):

Meanwhile, St. Kofi tsk-tsks his naughty little son.

This morning I broke with my usual routine after an email from Sean Kinsell invited me to join him and fellow blogger Tom Brennan in Philadelphia.

What a treat! Tom is one of the great ones, whose writing skills I have long admired -- but from afar. I'm rather shy, and this is only the second time I've actually met a real blogger. As it turned out, none of us had met other bloggers before. (Well, I once attended a lecture delivered by a rock star-type blogger, but that's a little different.)

Tom led us to an Indian restaurant so good (and so reasonably priced) that it deserves a plug, so if you're ever in Philadelphia, by all means try Samosa Indian Vegetarian Restaurant.

After we ate and were getting ready to leave, I realized that if I didn't have a group shot of this occasion I'd be kicking myself for days. My camera has a timer setting, and as I was trying to balance the thing precariously on a railing so I could set it off and then jump into the picture, a nearby customer took pity on me, and here's the result:

Yeah, the layout, focus, and lighting need work, and there should be something in that niche on the wall, but the spirit is there, and I am not about to Photoshop tasteful wall decorations into an informal luncheon snapshot.

Sean had a gift for Tom; some beautifully packaged green tea from Japan. I made Tom and Sean slow down the tea presentation ceremony while I whipped out my camera (despite protestations that it might look like a drug deal was in progress).

(So far as I know, green tea is still legal in every state.)

After that Tom had to go back to work, while Sean spent a little time sightseeing before continuing his travels.

UPDATE: Many thanks to Glenn Reynolds for kindly linking to this post -- especially for recognizing the need for limits.

But now I'm thinking about the wall decorations at Jessica's Well, and I'm wondering.... Maybe she got the picture right. (You know, parallel universes and all that.)

Welcome all InstaPundit readers!

UPDATE: A missing wall decoration has been found:

It's, um, tasteful (if not tofurkey).

MORE: In a post called "Where Is the Outrage" AgendaBender offers grim warnings about the future of the Gay Industrialized World. And something about a problem with painful spikes! (Heads will roll....)

And they're closing in on poor Sean, who's beginning to discover what he was missing in Japan!

I see that the Alexander the Great film is stirring more nonsensical controversies like this:

.... conservative Christians have loudly denounced Alexander as "pro-gay" propaganda from Tinseltown, insisting that Alexander was a firmly hetero hero. To add to the film's problems, the public has stayed away from what was to be the big movie of the Thanksgiving weekend.

Since opening, it has grossed just under $20m (£10.5m), leaving it in sixth place in a table of the most popular current films behind National Treasure, The Incredibles, Christmas with the Kranks, The Polar Express and even The SpongeBob SquarePants Movie.

The mainstream press has also ridiculed the movie - calling it everything from a "noble failure" to an "indifferent epic".

It is being suggested that a film about a global warrior with dyed blond hair and waxed legs was never going to conquer an America fresh out of a presidential election in which gay rights became a major issue.

The film is a blowsy biography of the Macedonian conqueror, long on emotional speeches and short on battles. But the poor script and suspect casting is only partly to blame.

According to one online critic,Alexander is a flop because he is "as gay as a maypole". Christians considering seeing the film have even been urged to "speak to your pastors immediately because Satan is attempting to enter your mind".

But enter modern politics, and they'll slam a closet door on a man who never imagined such a thing, then open the closet and "out" him, then argue over and denounce a "sexuality" he wouldn't have comprehended, and then place him in the "Satanic" camp when he never knew Satan.

The whole thing is laughable.

Except no one seems to be laughing.

MORE: Did Alexander the Great anticipate that someday, he'd be expected to reach out and "conquer an America fresh out of a presidential election in which gay rights became a major issue?" I think I followed the presidential campaign as closely as most people, but until today I never realized that "gay rights" was a "major issue" -- much less that it was setting the stage for Alexander's final conquest.

But then, I'm not Oliver Stone. . .

UPDATE: Once again, Belmont Club's Wretchard has an excellent post about what Oliver Stone is not saying about Alexander's dark side, especially the cruelty and slaughter so common in ancient times:

While attempting to organize a resistance against Alexander, Darius was betrayed by one his subordinates, Bessus, and slain. Bessus had calculated on winning the gratitude of Alexander; but the demi-god understood above all how treason, now that he was king, had to be rewarded. Bessus was cruelly mutilated at Alexander's command and executed.

Hollywood may have calculated that none of this was important; that the sole point of interest of a population weaned on the tabloids was the earth-shaking question of whether or not Alexander was gay. Jeanne Reames-Zimmerman convincingly argues the poverty of the question. In her monograph, Reames-Zimmerman argues that the concept of gayness, as it is presently understood, did not exist in the ancient world. From her discussion it is possible to say that Alexander might have been gay in the sense that convicts in a penitentiary are gay -- an exercise in power by one man over another -- and if that analogy is inexact so is any other. The world of 320 BC is as distant from us today as the 19th century, the last point in time when men intuitively understood the ancient world.

(Via Glenn Reynolds.)

Try as we might, we can't feel either.

More: Pain and ancient morality:

Gaius Mucius, a Roman youth, vowed to assassinate the Etruscan King Porsenna but mistakenly killed the king's treasurer, who was distributing wages to the soldiers. Brought before Porsenna, Gaius announced that he was but one of many youths sworn to slay him.

To prove the Romans' resolve to resist the invading Porsenna, he held his hand in the fire without flinching until it burned away. Amazed by this demonstration, Porsenna set him free and concluded peace with Rome. Thereafter, Gaius Mucius, known as Mucius Scaevola (the left-handed), became a symbol of Roman virtue.

Here's hoping all Classical Values readers had an edifying, tasty Thanksgiving. We all have much to be thankful for, and in line with our holiday traditions, I'm hoping that you leave here feeling stuffed. And have I got the turkey to do it for you.

I promised you more Rifkin ages ago, then failed to deliver. Mea Culpa. Today, months later, we begin our exploration of what many Rifkin aficionados consider to be his most important work, the one that put him on the map, "Entropy". This one is the gold standard by which all subsequent Rifkiniana must be measured. I would classify his earlier evangelical work as more of a "hidden treasure".

The Rifkin Ideal Form is followed, as always. Identify a Problem, with as much fear-mongering hyperbole as the market will bear. Follow up with a selective statistics dump, from whatever cherry-picked sources suit best. This is to establish "credibility". Sorces should sound authoritative, even if they're not.

Propose a grand, overarching theory, that neatly and simplistically explains How We Got Here as well as what we should Do About It.

Laud the marvels of the brave new world to come, a world almost within our grasp, if only a few simple transformational concepts can be implemented. Caution the naysayers (more sorrow than anger, please). Re-emphasize the importance of destroying industrial capitalism.

Close on a quiet note of swelling, inevitable triumph. That's our Rifkin!

Let's start slow and savor the experience, shall we? And fair warning. This is going to be a long slog. Most Rifkin Fans like to focus on a mere half dozen or so of his most memorable gems. Here at Classical Values we give you the real deal. Acre after acre of "misanthropy and misconceptions", scarcely touched by an editorial presence.

Before we're through, I want you to feel in your bones just how how much of a horse's ass this guy is. If you get a little weary, by all means feel free to skip my snarky interjections. The real meat is in the block quotes. And if you feel as though you just can't take any more, I surely couldn't blame you, but please, please read the bold-face excerpts.

If we continue to ignore the truth of the Entropy Law and its role in defining the broad context in which our physical world unfolds, then we shall do so at the risk of our own extinction.

The grandest motivator of all marketing strategies, learn my message or die!

Each day we awake to a world that appears more confused and disordered than the one we left the night before. Nothing seems to work anymore…Our leaders are forever lamenting and apologizing…The powers that be continue to address the problems at hand with solutions that create even greater problems than the ones they were meant to solve... P 3

…garbage and pollution are piling up in every quarter, oozing out of the ground, seeping into our rivers, and lingering in our air. Our eyes burn, our skin discolors, our lungs collapse, and all we can think of is retreating indoors and closing the shutters. P 3

Now, whenever I find my lungs collapsing, getting indoors is not the first thing to cross my mind. What good would it do, anyway? This is a textbook example of Rifkin's curiously infelicitous prose style. "Closing the shutters"? Sheesh.

…at the present time no single leader or ideology on this planet can effectively address the universal crisis at hand, because all are committed to the existing world view, one that is diseased and dying and is contaminating everything it gave birth to. P 4

Subtlety is for losers, eh? You have to get the marks fired up early.

The Entropy Law has a special power. It is so utterly overwhelming that, once fully internalized, it transforms everyone it comes in contact with; it is this almost mystical attraction that makes the Entropy Law so frightening to take hold of. Yet.... few people can resist the temptation to do just that. The allure lies in its all-encompassing nature.The Entropy law is the assassin of the truths of the Modern Age.... Now those truths have metamorphosed into monstrous lies which threaten our continued existence. Pp 6-7

I should probably take a moment to point out that this entropy Law he goes on about is not generally recognized by scientists or engineers. It was manufactured more or less out of whole cloth by Nicholas Georgescu-Rogen, an economist with a fancy-pants name and seemingly, a knack for the creative interpretation of physics.

Already the outline of the new entropy paradigm is being filled in by scholars around the world. Within a few years every academic discipline will be turned inside out by the new entropy conception. P 7

Reality check. Twenty four years have come and gone, and Entropy Studies have yet to sweep the campuses.

It should be emphasized that the Entropy Law deals only with the physical world where everything is finite and where all living things must run their course and eventually cease to be. It is a law governing the horizontal world of time and space. It is mute, however, when it comes to the vertical world of spiritual transcendence.

The spiritual plane is not governed by the ironclad dictates of the Entropy Law. The spirit is a nonmaterial dimension where there are no boundaries and no fixed limits to attend to. The relationship of the physical to the spiritual world is the relationship of a small part to the larger unbound whole within which it unfolds. While the Entropy Law governs the world of time, space, and matter, it is, in turn, governed by the primordial spiritual forces that conceived it. P 8

Jacques Ellul has clearly been a major influence here. As they say, "A little knowledge..."

Studies of the few remaining hunter-gatherer societies bear out much of Hesiod’s account. Detailed examinations of the African Bushmen and other hunter-gatherer groups provide some real surprises for those of us who like to believe that human history has been a progressive journey....

…The fact is, contemporary hunter-gatherers work no more than twelve to twenty hours per week, and for weeks and months each year they do no work at all. Instead, their time is filled with leisure pursuits including games, sporting events, art, music, dance, ceremonies, and visiting with neighbors. Contrary to popular opinion, studies of the few remaining hunter-gatherer societies show that some are among the healthiest people in the world. Their diets are nutritious, and many,--like the Bushmen in Africa--live well into their sixties without the aid of modern medicine. Many hunter-gatherer societies place a premium on cooperation and sharing, and show little inclination for warring and aggression against each other or outside groups. P 11

Gosh, they live well into their sixties... Stumbling across the hunter-gatherer meme was an unexpected treat. Someday I hope to compare and contrast the various passages from Kass, Ehrlich, Rifkin, and everyone's favorite tobacco farmer, the incomparable Wendell Berry. For now, let's just say that subsequent field surveys by cultural anthropologists have shown that life as a hunter-gatherer can be less satisfying than the idyll described here.

Jane Jacobs first brought to my attention the truly horrific (comparable to inner Detroit or South Central L.A.) homicide rates among the Inuit and the Kalahari Bushmen. The most cursory follow-up on my part acquainted me with the Gebusi, a tribe where one in three adult male deaths is the result of a murder. Quibblers may note that the Gebusi practice agriculture. Shame.

The machine age is now so firmly inside of us that it is difficult to know where it stops and we start. Even the words that come out of our mouths are no longer our words, they are the machine’s words. We “measure” our relationships with other people by whether we are in “synchronization” with them. Our feelings are reduced to good or bad “vibrations.” We no longer initiate activity; instead we are a “self-starter.” We avoid “friction” at work and choose to “tune in” rather than pay attention. We think of people’s lives as either “running smoothly” or “breaking down.” If the latter, then we expect that in short order they will be put back together or “readjusted.” P 18

Note: One could as easily argue that we have been nauticised by exposure to His Majesties Royal Navy. We "make headway", we are "taken aback", we are in the "doldrums", we don’t have room to "swing a cat", nonsense can be "utter bilge", our house can be "shipshape" from "stem to stern", we give the old "heave-ho", or try a different "tack", set a "new course" etc., etc., et tedious cetera. I think of Rifkin as a "loose cannon". Don't get me started on cowboys.

Here on earth there are two sources of available energy: our terrestrial stock and the solar flow from the sun…While the sun’s energy is degrading with every passing second, its entropy will not reach a maximum until long after the earth’s available terrestrial stock has been completely used up. Pp 36-37

Not to be pedantic, but the sun is actually getting hotter. If nothing is done to ameliorate the situation, Earth may well become uninhabitable in as little as half a billion years. You could not possibly make me worry about it less than I do now.

Every time you light a cigarette, the available energy in the world decreases. Of course, as already pointed out, it’s possible to reverse the entropy process in an isolated time and place, but only by using up additional energy in the process and thus increasing the overall entropy of the environment…A point that needs to be emphasized over and over again is that here on earth material entropy is continually increasing and must ultimately reach a maximum. That’s because the earth is a closed system in relation to the universe. With the exception of an occasional meteorite that falls to earth and some cosmic dust, our planet remains a closed subsystem of the universe…

Would that it were so. Interestingly, many of the richest nickel and platinum lodes appear to be the sites of ancient impact events. I suppose we could ask the dinosaurs to confirm that, if they weren’t all dead.

The fixed endowment of terrestrial matter that makes up the earth’s crust is continually dissipating. Mountains are wearing down and topsoil is being blown away with each passing second. That is why, in the final analysis, even renewable resources are really nonrenewable over the long haul. While they continue to reproduce, the life and death of new organisms increase the entropy of the earth...

Every farmer understands that, even with recycling and constant sunshine, it’s impossible to grow the same amount of grass on the same spot year after year in perpetuity. Every blade of grass grown today means one less blade of grass that can be grown some time in the future on that same spot. P37-38

Ireland has been green for six thousand years, at least. How did they manage that?
Another funny thing. I drove across Oklahoma last year and couldn't find any trace of that dust bowl thing. What happened? And what about the rain forests? Are they guilty of overly profligate entropic expenditure? They sure do grow a lot.

Today, the frontier mentality remains alive and well among space enthusiasts who claim that we can always move on to colonize and exploit other planets. Their expectations can’t be met. Sending up just the population increase on earth of six days of births would cost the equivalent of our entire gross national product for one year. Then, too, astronomers tell us that the nearest solar system to ours with planets that might possibly be comparable in climatic conditions is ten light-years away, and with our present technology it would take over a hundred years to travel there…

Reality check. More like one hundred thousand years. NASA would sacrifice your first born children to reach one tenth light speed.

Finally, the idea that valuable resources could be mined and sent back to earth from other planets in the quantities needed is completely ridiculous. The cost of mining additional resources on earth is already becoming prohibitive. Even assuming we could locate planets with resources that would be usable in some way here on earth, there is no way we could ever afford the costs of mining and transporting the materials from these distant places. Pp 66-67

Actually, I think there might be something to the idea. Certainly, if you believe in technological advancement, it should eventually become more affordable. Just ask that Rutan fella. But, the certainty displayed here, "no way ever", is pretty much a standard feature of a good Rifkin Rant.

The faster we streamline our technology, the faster we speed up the transforming process, the faster available energy is dissipated, the more the disorder mounts… In short, we live in a kind of nightmarish Orwellian world. P 79

So I suppose we might just as well quit. Go out all at once, in a huge blowout party. After all, if we start husbanding resources for our grandchildren, leaving them “in the pantry” as it were, we can eke out a bit more time, but what’s the point? The grandkids will have grandchildren of their own one day, and so on, ad infinitum. Just how many generations are we planning on scrimping for? Collectivization offers a modicum of hope.

In hearings before the Joint Economic Committee of Congress in 1976, many of the experts on technology even suggested that diminishing returns might have set in across the board and that America’s great technological strides of the past would probably never be repeated. One witness before the hearings shocked the congressional assemblage by pointing out that in the past ten years, after all the billions of dollars spent in research and development, only two technological breakthroughs with a 100 percent market potential were introduced, permanent-press pants and pocket calculators. Not very impressive. P 85

Well, no wonder space resources can't save us. The irony here is just killing me.

Addiction! There is simply no other way to accurately describe America’s energy habit. The statistics are overwhelming. With only 6 percent of the world’s population, the United States currently consumes over one third of the world’s energy. P 99

"No other way..."

It has been said before that the world could not possibly support another America. Looking at these figures, it becomes apparent that even one America is more than the world can afford.

"could not possibly..." Nice. "Another America..." Nicer.

It should also be understood that there is no way to allow for the needs of future generations in classical economic theory. When we meet as buyers and sellers in the marketplace we make decisions based on the relative abundance or scarcity of things as they affect us. No one speaks for future generations at the marketplace, and for this reason, everyone who comes after us starts off much poorer than we did in terms of nature’s remaining endowment. P 134

And we are SO much poorer than our nineteenth century ancestors, as they, in turn, stand positively beggared beside their medieval forbears. A clincher, a definite clincher...

…One would be hard pressed to deny what everyone accepts as gospel: that American agricultural technology is extraordinarily efficient. Yet, the truth is that it’s the most inefficient form of farming ever devised by humankind. One farmer with an ox and plow produces a more efficient yield per energy expended than the giant mechanized agrifarms of modern America. Hard to believe, but it’s absolutely true. Pp 136-137

And therefore we should...what? Farm with oxen? The seventies were chock full of conceptual blockbusters like this one. If one chooses to measure crop output per man, or even per man-hour, the conclusion is reversed. We trade the liberal use of energy for hours of lifespan spent away from the farm, a good deal if you’ve got the fuel for it.

The well-known exception to these historical limitations was the ancient city of Rome. At its peak, it grew to a population of nearly one million people. The Roman city could only be sustained, however, by attempting to colonize everything in its path. Without its vast pool of slaves, intensive farming techniques, massive aqueduct-building projects, and, most importantly, the empire’s armies, Rome could not possibly have supported its population. In a sense, the entire known world had to be pillaged to overcome the natural limitation imposed by a solar-agricultural energy base.

Murray Bookchin puts it well when he writes, “The Fall of Rome can be explained by the rise of Rome. The Latin city was carried to imperial heights not by the resources of its rural environs, but by spoils acquired from the systematic looting of the Near East, Egypt, and North Africa. The very process involved in maintaining the Roman cosmopolis destroyed the cosmopolis.

That seems just a little too simple to me. But who am I to question Murray Bookchin?
I'm just glad I could work in a Classical angle. I don't do enough of that.

Once embarked on the course of urban expansion, Rome was in a losing race…

Rome serves as a case study of what can happen when an urban area vainly seeks to ignore the growth limitations imposed on it by its surrounding resource base. Seeking out far-flung energy resources can serve to delay the collapse, but eventually the day of reckoning must come. Such is the case in our own time. Pp 150-151

"must come..." But what about Alexandria, or Constantinople, or Jerusalem? Or the great millennia-old cities of India and China and the Fertile Crescent? Rather than looking to some theoretical notion of entropic limits, might it not be more helpful to examine the waxing and waning of political and military power, and how those can be affected by negative incentives in the tax structure? I think they call it history.

The near fiscal collapse of New York and Cleveland is a sign of what lies ahead for our overgrown and outworn cities in the next two decades. P 156

Not Cleveland!

The remaining reservoirs of untapped nonrenewable resources are primarily in the hands of the poor Third World nations. These resources are their only remaining trump card to bargain for a more equitable redistribution of wealth between the industrialized countries and their own…

You knew it would come down to equitable redistribution, didn't you?

To those of us who have lived for decades on huge quantities of energy and resources provided by the Third World, it is easy to resent the squeeze that cartels will put on our economic system. A popular country-and western song of the summer of 1979 summed up the frustration many Americans felt over escalating OPEC oil prices: “No crude, no food.” In other words, if the Third World won’t sell us its petroleum, then we should withhold food exports from the world’s hungry.

No, no, just the hungry oil vendors. We’re fine with everybody else.

This kind of jingoistic attitude on our part is not only morally and politically indefensible, but it threatens our very survival. The choice is ours. We can either accept the new terms presented by Third World nations and cut back dramatically on our energy flow and material consumption, or we can intervene militarily to seize the resources we need… p 188

Again with the either/or ultimatums. How about, we can seek out other sources in the North Sea and Russia and Latin America, while simultaneously keeping the pressure on OPEC by bankrolling solar, coal, and tar sands research. And it’s not too late for “safer” next generation fission reactors. How I hate these reductionist analyses.

…as long as we in the United States continue to consume one-third of the world’s resources annually, the Third World can never rise to even a semblance of a standard of living that can adequately support human life with dignity. Those who are irate over the formation of resource cartels as an economic weapon to be used against rich nations like our own had best ask themselves what they would do if they were living in the Third World…. P 189

Yep. We're the bad guys again.

As long as we continue to devour the lion’s share of resources, squandering the great bulk of them on trivialities while the rest of the world struggles to find its next meal, we have no right to lecture other peoples on how to conduct their economic development. Therefore, if we are truly committed to preventing our planet from being turned into a giant industrial sewer, we must begin, now, voluntarily, to substantially limit our own material wealth. We must show our own willingness to accept hard sacrifices in the name of humanity. P 190

"Hard sacrifices"equals redistribution, at the very least. Maybe with guns, eh?

However, this too must be said: no Third World nation should harbor hopes that it can ever reach the material abundance that has existed in America over the past few decades.

This last quote angered me greatly as a young man. To be honest, it still kinda ticks me. Let's play it again, with the volume turned up.

"NO THIRD WORLD NATION SHOULD HARBOR HOPES THAT IT CAN EVER REACH THE MATERIAL ABUNDANCE THAT HAS EXISTED IN AMERICA..."

This is just sinister and wrong. Did he even believe it himself?

To put its faith in Western-style development is a cruel hoax, simply because it is a physical impossibility even if there were a complete redistribution of the world’s resources….

Yeah, and if redistribution can't do it, we all know it just can't be done.

It is thus impossible for the rest of the world to develop as the United States has. In fact, as we have already seen, absolute resource scarcity makes it impossible that even the United States can continue at anything near its present level of energy flow. This is not, however, to dismiss the absolute necessity of fostering economic development in the Third World. The question is: What kind of development is appropriate to poor nations? Pp 190-191

"Appropriate” development, eh? Sounds unpleasantly familiar.

….It is clear that Third World nations must seek different forms of development from those used in the industrialized West. High-energy, centralized technology should be eschewed in favor of intermediate technology that is labor intensive and can be used in local villages…

In other words, peasants.

Several appropriate models for Third World development already exist. Before Mao’s death, the People’s Republic of China organized itself in a way that maintained the rural base of the society and favored labor-intensive production. China is not a rich society, but no one is starving to death--or is jobless or homeless, either.

Make that oppressed peasants. And they WERE starving.

More attention should also be turned to the Gandhian economic model….Gandhian economics favors the country over the city, agriculture over industry, small-scale techniques over high technology. Only this general set of economic priorities can lead to successful Third World development. Pp 192-193

Accepting higher and higher prices for all nonrenewable resources means a steady contracting of the American economy. For the first time in our countries history we will have to deal with the ultimate political and economic question—redistribution of wealth…

The contraction of the American economy has already begun. On September 6, 1979, the Secretary of the Treasury warned the nation that it must go through “a period of austerity”.… There is really only one viable solution: it is imperative that there be a massive redistribution of wealth and power in this society. Without that redistribution, the poor and working classes in America will rightly condemn any talk of austerity or economic sacrifice…

"Mom, he's scaring me."

"Hush, baby."

Without a fundamental redistribution of wealth, all talk of lowering energy flow and heeding our planet’s biological limits will result in nothing but the rich locking the poor forever into their subservient status The chic upper-class ecologists, with their hot-tubs, their quarter-million-dollar homes, their designer clothes, and their Mercedes Benzes, had best realize that their calls for clean air must be accompanied by meaningful actions that will lead to a redistribution of their own unwarranted economic abundance. If they do not voluntarily begin to make this economic adjustment, then others will make it for them. Pp 194-195

UNWARRANTED ECONOMIC ABUNDANCE

In a high-entropy culture, the overriding purpose of life becomes one of using high energy flow to create material abundance and satisfy every conceivable human desire….

Which would be wrong?

having banished God from society, the high-entropy, materialist value system attempts to provide a heaven on earth….

Mere assertion, manifestly untrue.

We have denied the qualitative, the spiritual, the metaphysical…We have gloried in the concepts of material progress, efficiency, and specialization above all other values. In the process, we have destroyed family, community, tradition….Now our world view and social system are falling victim to the very process of their creation. Everywhere we look, the entropy of our world is reaching staggering proportions…. P 205

Again, not necessarily true.

There is no doubt that we are in for a massive institutional realignment….But before we can even begin to broadly outline the nature of agriculture, industry, and commerce in a low-entropy society, we must turn our attention to first principles….the Big Questions of the past are destined to re-emerge in the low-entropy world that awaits us….. p 206

The governing ethical principle of a low-entropy world view is to minimize energy flow. Excessive material wealth is recognized as an irreversible diminution of the world’s precious resources…. A low-entropy society deemphasizes material consumption...Human needs are met, but whimsical, self-indulgent desires—the kind pandered to in every shopping center in the country—are not.

The traditional wisdom, as embodied in all the great world religions, has long taught that the ultimate purpose of human life is not the satisfaction of all material desires, but rather the experience of liberation that comes from becoming one with the metaphysical unity of the universe…

I beg to differ.

In Sanskrit, it is put most succinctly: Tat tvam asi (That art thou). To know this in the very ground of our being and to conduct our life in accordance with this transcendent reality: this is the human development that that comes from an adherence to traditional wisdom…. Pp 206-207

So now he’s channeling Joseph Campbell.

In a low-entropy culture the individual is expected to live a much more frugal or Spartan life-style….In the new age, the less production and consumption necessary to maintain a healthy, decent life, the better….

In a high-entropy environment, human labor has no real positive value….Work, especially physical labor is considered demeaning….

Unless you worked in silicon valley during the nineties…

As for what is produced, that hardly matters at all…No one takes responsibility for determining whether something should be produced or not. As long as a market for the item can be developed, it will be provided. Thus, society is deluged by a plethora of material effluence—microwave ovens, hair dryers, automobiles that poison the air, and prescription drugs that poison the body….

And this is clearly a sore spot for Rifkin. No one takes responsibility. No one is IN CHARGE. No one is there to say no to consumer demand, and make it stick. Clearly it would be wrong to allow choice to remain in the hands of the consumers. Clearly, they need guidance.

In a low-entropy culture, work is understood to be an activity as necessary for the proper life-balance as sleep, contemplation, or play….

But not just any kind of work can be considered appropriate. It must be designed, first and foremost, to provide dignity and purpose for the worker…. Pp 208-209

That is, small crafts, tilling the soil, animal husbandry…life is very beautiful at the ashram. Can we do weaving?

In a low-entropy culture the concept of private property is retained for consumer goods and services but not for land and other renewable and nonrenewable resources. The long-accepted practice of private exploitation of “natural” property is replaced with the notion of public guardianship….

As pronounced and elaborated upon by “Public Guardians”, no doubt. The road to serfdom, with an entropically correct gang of Mutaween to promote ecological virtue...

Individual rights are protected, but they are no longer regarded as the dominant reference point from which to judge society. Instead, the notion of public duties, and responsibilities once again gains ascendancy as the dominant social motif, as it has been throughout most of history.

Do we really want to return to living as we did throughout most of history?

In a low-entropy society, our modern view of man and woman divorced from the workings of the ecosystem gives way to a holistic comprehension of the interrelatedness of all phenomena…. Once it is understood that human beings are “one” with nature, then an ethical base is established by which the appropriateness of all human activity can be judged. P 211

The scary thing is, there are still plenty of citizens who totally agree with these sentiments. I bought a Rifkin book (used) six months ago at a local, independent bookstore. My attractive, friendly, clearly under thirty salesperson opined that my purchase looked “really interesting”. She went on to say that she just “loved!” Jeremy Rifkin. She looked so cute in her levis and fringed buckskin vest, that I could only nod my silent assent.

All the great teachers of traditional wisdom have embraced the values inherent to a low-entropy life. Buddha, Jesus, Muhammed, the prophets of Israel, and the mahatmas of India all led exemplary lives of simplicity, voluntary poverty, and communal sharing. P 212

One wonders.

Small-scale labor-intensive agriculture will require a massive shift of people away from the cities and back to the farms. The transition will not take place overnight…. Eventually the proportion of farm to city population will have to reverse itself if human life is to survive….An agricultural way of life will dominate the coming Solar Age as it has in every other period of history before our own….

Cambodia will have much to teach us as we implement the relocations.

“Large” cities will once again return to their preindustrial size of 50,000 to 100,000 citizens.

Perhaps. But more likely because of terrorism, suitcase nukes, and cheap telepresence than ginned up entropic limits.

Along with the scaling down of cities, transportation systems are also going to be vastly reoriented in the years to come. The high cost of energy is going to force a fundamental shift in the pattern of travel away from automobiles and trucks and toward greater mass transit and long-distance rail use…

Our social and economic life will undergo radical changes reflecting the change in transportation….

You CAN live your dream, Jeremy.

Because of escalating energy and resource costs, industry will reverse its historical trend and convert back from energy- and capital-intensive production modes to labor-intensive ones….

Agriculture, which will no longer be able to continue its mechanized farming techniques, will also become far more labor intensive….

Channeling Pol Pot and Wendell Berry, simultaneously...

In keeping with the dictum that the low-entropy economy is one of necessities, not luxuries or trivialities, production will center on goods required to maintain life. To recognize the extent to which production will be diminished, we have only to take a tour through a suburban mall and ask ourselves, “How many of these products are even marginally useful in sustaining life?” Any honest appraisal is sure to conclude that most of what is manufactured in our economy is simply superfluous. P 218

...Not to mention Savonarola.

The production that does continue should take place within certain guidelines in keeping with the low-entropy paradigm….Of course, adhering to these guidelines will necessarily mean that certain items will become impossible to produce.

These next few quotes sound as though he’s in labor with Paul Ehrlich’s Malthusian love-child.

A Boeing 747, for instance, simply cannot be manufactured by a small company employing several hundred individuals. Thus, a new ethic will have to be adopted as the litmus test of what should be produced in the low-entropy society: if it cannot be made locally by the community, using readily available resources and technology, then it is most likely unnecessary that it be produced at all.

Pacing, Jere. Remember your breathing.

Many industries will not be able to withstand the transition to a low energy flow. Unable to adapt to the new economic environment, the automotive, aerospace, petrochemical, and other industries will slide into extinction.

The new paradigm’s head is in sight!

The move toward a low-entropy economy will spell the end of the reign of the multinational corporation…. pp 218-219

Remember, It’s Paul’s baby, too…

….the low-entropy age we are moving into will require a great reduction in world population. The massive explosion in world population is really only understandable when viewed in thermodynamic terms….

Push, Jere. Push!...Say to yourself..."It's Paul's baby.".

The implications of a thermodynamic view of population growth are staggering…

Breathe! Push!

Ooops. It was stillborn.

Lucky for us.

I'm sure the MSM will have lots of fun with this:

"Just to let everyone know, my mother was murdered."

This simple yet startling sentence marks the last entry Rachelle Waterman made in her Internet journal before she was arrested on charges she participated in killing her mother. And it marks the beginning of an online discussion that's as remarkable for its popularity as its content.

Waterman is the 16-year-old high school honor student from Craig jailed with two 24-year-old men who troopers say schemed for months to kill 48-year-old Lauri Waterman.

Waterman started her diary on LiveJournal.com in September of last year, and anyone with Internet access can read the 100-plus entries she's written.

She made her final entry Nov. 18, the Thursday after she spent the weekend in Anchorage playing in the state volleyball tournament. While she was at the tournament, police say, her two accomplices killed her mother.

The Nov. 18 entry includes two more sentences by Waterman explaining she won't be online for a while, because police seized her computer.

For several days, the Web site was quiet. Then came stories about Waterman's arrest and arraignment, some of which mentioned the journal. Since then, it's become a hot spot.

On Wednesday, the day of the arraignment, 11 readers had commented on Waterman's final entry. By midday Friday, the number was up to 256. Twenty-four hours later, it was over 1,600.

Most seem to be written by teens and young adults. Many are glib, some are heartfelt, a few are disturbing and a number are obscene.

Taken together, they create a fascinating peephole into a world where lock-and-key diaries have been replaced by journals written for the whole planet to read and respond to, a world where voyeurism has been compounded by participation.

Here's the proof (the fatal journal called "My Crappy Life"). (Via Geeklife.)

Blogging causes murder!

I just knew it!

Clearly, something has to be done. How many more must die?

If we could save just one life!

(And I thought all blogging might lead to was political hardball.)

UPDATE: Here's an example of the type of political hardball which I might expect to be directed against bloggers of unpopular opinions. (Via Glenn Reynolds.)

Never give in. Never give in. Never, never, never, never--in nothing, great or small, large or petty--never give in, except to convictions of honour and good sense. Never yield to force. Never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy.

-- Winston Churchill

It isn't often that I get as angry as I was last night. But I've had a good night's sleep and calmed down, so now I might be able to write about the problem in what I hope will be a more or less objective manner. (Considering that Sean Kinsell has called me mellow, I now have a -- what's the word? -- reputation to uphold!)

Anyway, some recent intrusive personal attacks against Nick Packwood -- one of my oldest and dearest friends in the blogosphere -- are simply outrageous. Nick's post was highlighted earlier by Steven Malcolm Anderson in a comment, and linked by Glenn Reynolds yesterday, and it's important enough that I think a little background is in order.

It seems that a jealous blogger (apparently a licensed clinical psychologist) tried repeatedly to glom onto Nick's site and was banned from commenting. For that, she's launched into a major snit fit, and is questioning Nick's fitness to teach. (For the details of the dispute, I suggest reading this fairly neutral account from a Canadian blogger originally loathe to take sides, but who ended up siding with Nick.)

Nick, it seems, committed two major crimes in the eyes of this psychologist:

Here's what Nick said, in a wonderful analogy to free ice cream:

Ghost of a flea is a blog written and published at my time and expense for reasons I am not certain I can properly articulate. Most of the time it is a labour of love but it remains labour nonetheless. If you spot something here and choose to write about it please have the common courtesy to offer a link in recognition of my work. If you are an argumentative soul regularly outraged at my ramblings I suggest you vent your feelings at your own expense elsewhere. And if you find all this free ice cream is not to your taste please feel free to read something else or, better yet, write something more interesting. I am certain the world will beat a path to your door and bask in your fascinating thoughts. When I shut down the Flea it will give people something else to read and if you are especially lucky you can pay for the bandwidth they will use to tell you how boring your work is.

My admittedly low standards are offended.

As to Nick's "crime," well, there's no question that the women are extremely attractive. I have admitted that I am bisexual, but I think if I were 100% homosexual I'd still be turned on. That's how good they are. I have never asked Nick whether he's turned on personally by the pictures, because it's none of my business. But whether he is or not, whether I am or not, is that the point? The women are incredibly beautiful. They're as much art as any classical works of art depicting the female anatomy, and while they're hot and slick by modern American standards, they're not even nude, much less pornographic!

So come on! Unless you're an Iranian mullah, what exactly is the problem? The more I thought it over, the more I suspected that the primary complainant is more along the lines of a troll than anything else. And by definition there's no pleasing a troll, because they seek attention, not fairness on the merits.

Nick has also been featuring regular posts like this on Winston Churchill:

We will not win a war against fanatical puritanism by pandering to the puritans in our own ranks. There is plenty we have to say that may offend one another. That is the first and last prerequisite of the liberty for which we fight. If we are not to be intimidated by the men who would saw off ours heads we cannot allow our purpose and our policy to be dictated by those who are afraid of their own shadows. You may eat granola, watch improving documentaries and wag your finger as you wish. I would rather have champagne for breakfast. We shall see who lives longer and who dies happier.

The Winston Review is a Flea-feature intended to offer spirited, uplifting alternatives to the defeatists and apologists of the mainstream media. This week's Review is dedicated to smoking, drinking and loving too much (as if that last were even possible). God bless the spirit of Winston Churchill.

I see this as an attack on the beautiful by the ugly. The dark side is that when ugliness attacks beauty, the ugliness is made uglier. The bright side is that the beautiful is made more beautiful.

So I think Nick will win.

As he should.

When I created the "What ancient form of execution would you LEAST prefer?" test, my American naiveté was showing. Considering a news item I saw today, some of them really shouldn't be called "ancient."

In Iran, they're scourging to death children as young as 14:

14-year-old boy ‘flogged to death’ by para-military police in western Iran

Tehran, Nov. 25 - New information has come to light over the sudden death of a 14-year-old schoolboy in western Iran, who died after being flogged for “eating in public” during the holy Islamic month of Ramadan.

Kaveh Habibi-Nejad died Nov. 12 and was buried in the cemetery of the Kurdish city of Sanadaj on Nov. 13, according to his death certificate.

The new information is the official report by the coroner’s office in Sanandaj. The report states that the boy died “as a result of brain hemorrhage, after the back of his skull was fractured by a blow from a hard object”.

Eye-witnesses had previously reported that Kaveh lost consciousness while being flogged by agents of Law Enforcement Forces, Iran’s paramilitary police force. They said they believed he died because “the metal cable being used to flog him hit his head”.

Flogging young men and teenagers in public for a range of offenses such as drinking alcohol or eating in public during the fasting season is common in Iranian cities. (Link via Banafsheh Zand-Bonazzi)

(You'd think they could have at least used a sjambok or something less lethal.)

MORE: Here's Banafsheh Zand-Bonazzi on the Iranian reaction to Michael Moore, and Fahrenheit 9/11:

After 25 years of living in a virtual concentration camp, Iranians have become exceedingly socio-politically savvy. Moore’s anti-American propaganda did not attract anywhere near as many viewers as the Mullahs had hoped for. Tehran’s despots had hoped the film would challenge the Iranian people’s favourable notion of President Bush and promote John Kerry.

But Iranians are too smart.

A group of 12 university students, for example, composed of both men and women who had seen the film, collectively wrote me and signed an e-mail which said: “Wow, this guy complains that Bush lied once. What would this windbag do if he lived here where our president lies to us once an hour?”

Another comment was: “This guy gets to publicly accuse Bush of lying and becomes famous and adored worldwide. We, here, complain about some decrepit and inconsequential government lackey and we not only go to prison but some of us get death sentences. He ought to thank his lucky stars he lives in a country where he’s allowed and even encouraged to be this obnoxious…”

Someone else quipped: “If he thinks that the U.S. is so bad, he’s welcome to trade places with us…since he’s so forgiving of brutal Middle Eastern dictators!”

Another young man said: “They are showing this film to erase from our minds the idea of America being the great liberator; maybe Americans themselves don’t appreciate what they have but we sure do!”

Another comment was: “Outside such pathetic ideological schemes, Moore’s fixation to reprimand and castigate his own society is so great that he is BLIND to the fact that our ancient land and society cannot be regarded and dealt with in the same fashion; therefore he has fallen pray to the Mullahs for whom he is nothing more than a tool to discard when his mission for them is completed.”

My father, Siamak Pourzand, a 75-year-old Iranian journalist, film historian/critic/promoter has been a political prisoner since November of 2001 in the Islamic Republic of Iran, where he has experienced severe torture. During this time, not one member of the self-involved, international film community, to whom I reached out about his plight, responded. When in the fall of 2002 I called Michael Moore’s office, (like I did many other Hollywoodites) I was told: “Sorry, but Mr. Moore is too busy AND just can’t get involved in these types of matters because we can’t be sure who you are and what your agenda is.”

Or, the hanging of a 16 year old girl by a religious judge who personally put the rope around her neck? How about this 13 year old sentenced to be stoned to death? Is Moore too busy and "can’t get involved in these types of matters" because he can’t be sure who they are and what their agenda is?

Dennis hit the nail on the head with that last post about the damnable toll-takers' strike. Today's Inquirer featured a gruesome addition:

As Black Friday shoppers crammed into the King of Prussia mall, a pro-union Santa stood vigil with striking Pennsylvania Turnpike toll collectors nearby on day three of their first-ever strike.

At 380 pounds, the bearded, 60-year-old retiree and friend of striking workers was the picture of Santa, albeit with a Teamsters shirt beneath his red coat and a picket sign shoved under his wide black belt.

"My deer will not cross a picket line," Drexel Hill resident Tom Anthony warned as he waved to motorists at the Valley Forge interchange. "It will be a sad Christmas if Santa cannot come to the Northeast."

Motorists will first have to get through tomorrow, when the Turnpike Commission will use managers and temporary workers to collect $2 for cars journeying home from Thanksgiving celebrations and $15 for commercial freight. The commission decided against waiving tolls all day tomorrow, one of the busiest days of the year.

It's a disgrace all the way around, and the public is more than unsympathetic. Truly, the world would be a better place without tolls or toll takers.

Notice that the best they can come up with is support from imaginary animals -- Santa's reindeer!

Ungrateful ungulates! How dare they approve of harrassing the Christmas shoppers!

I was driving home on the Pennsylvania turnpike early Thursday morning for Thanksgiving with the family, and it happened that the tollbooth workers were on strike. When I'd originally gotten on there was simply a sign that read 'No Tickets' and I assumed that meant also 'No Tolls' so I may be getting a traffic ticket for speeding through the exit on the other end. (As it happens they're charging flat fees of $2 for passenger vehicles and $15 for commercial -- woe to ye planning short trips).

But that's not what this post is about. It's about labor unions, and the sage words of the emperor Trajan.

(I suspect I've gotten Eric's attention.)

When I reached my exit it seemed cars were avoiding the right lanes, but I need to veer off immediately after the booths to get home, so I always try to take the rightmost booth. As I approached I realized why people were steering clear. Two union strikers with large picket signs were walking slowly through the booth toward my car, and in annoyance I hit the horn and gunned the engine.

To their credit (and well-being) they got out of the way.

I have no tolerance for people disrupting my life or inconveniencing me for any reason, the least of which being a work-related dispute. The fact that you pay dues to a thuggish political organization doesn't give you the right to bring your disputes to my doorstep or to my bumper.

So as I drove away annoyed at the nerve of these men I remembered the correspondence of Pliny and Trajan on the aftermath of a devastating fire (Pliny Letters X.33-34).

Pliny asked the emperor whether it wouldn't be a good idea, having ordered the necessary equipment, to institute a guild or a union of firefighters.

Trajan warned that such unions invariably become political, and considering the state of the province in question, in which political faction was the norm, establishing a labor union would be inadvisable. Instead Pliny, commended for ordering the necessary equipment, was to employ a sort of volunteer force on an as needed basis.

Today the political nature of labor unions is unmistakable, and the sense of the union above all else results at times in thuggish behavior as simple as attempting to block a car, to making little girls cry.

I suspect many will object, but hey, I could have worse company than Trajan in my objection to the politicization of organized labor.

So I just knocked out this little graphic while chatting with a friend on the phone. Enjoy:

I'm WiFi blogging right now with Sean Kinsell, who is visiting from Japan.

Not a bad picture, considering it's the first I've taken of another blogger at work:

I'll let Sean see this before I publish the post.

I don't know whether I should say "WELCOME HOME, SEAN" or what, because it's just a short visit.

One problem with holding Thanksgiving so close to the elections is that people who disagree with each other are forced to gather together and do things like eat turkey, or at the very least call distant relatives on the phone -- in a process that inevitably seems to invite the creeping in of political discussions.

Which means I have to hear heated abuses of logic, and yesterday it was coming from Kerry supporters.

Right now there is a BIG abuse of logic going on, and for some reason it's being kept out of MSM (and even off the editorial pages of most newspapers). For the most part, in reponsible circles this is limited to an aroma of innuendo, but the hardcore are already starting to scream. They are pissed because there's a big stink about the Ukrainian election, but for some reason, the "BIG MEDIA" are ignoring the OBVIOUS parallel to our own recent election. In their minds, evidence of election fraud and chicanery in the Ukraine points to election fraud here.

In logic, of course, Ukrainian election fraud no more equals American election fraud than would election fraud in Uganda, but the human love of mythology (which drives most unfounded conspiracy claims) has very little to do with logic. Human nature being what it is, if people dislike a set of facts, they'll look for a way to deny them. Even the most scanty evidence will do.

As I pointed out previously, I think the Kerry supporters are grieving, and and in such a state it is as natural to cling to any form of denial available -- in much the same way that the family of someone who is dying grasps at the slimmest hopes, while death itself can often cause the most hardened (and reality-based?) atheists to develop heretical ideas about spirituality.

The obvious problem with the Ukrainian situation is that it's too close to our own election, and it invites denial-based speculation.

While the conspiracy sites I listed here are desperately soliciting funds, so far, the biggest reality-based sites aren't directly stoking this connection, but their surrogates [I guess "Hecate" is that] are already dangling hints like this:

Sounds as if they take election fraud seriously in Ukraine.

Interesting discussion concerning whether any position of power is worth a single human life. Too bad Lame Duckie [Bush] made exactly the wrong decision on this issue. In fact, his seizure of power has been based on the expenditure of human lives, both American and foreign. I believe we call people like that sociopaths.

All I Want for Xmas Is Fair and Verifiable Elections

...Watching what’s been happening in Ukraine, I wonder why Americans haven’t taken to the streets, as well.

....I don’t know for sure if this last election was stolen, although I know what my gut tells me. This study certainly gives me pause. However, the point of this thread isn’t to restart the why-did-Kerry-concede-why-isn’t-Atrios-screaming-about-Diebold debate. Here’s what I do know for sure and think everyone can agree upon: it’s important for all Americans, including those whose candidate didn’t prevail, to be able to have faith that our elections are carried out fairly and honestly. And the current situation doesn’t allow us to have that faith. Instead, what we have is a patchwork of fallible systems that appears designed more for the purpose of allowing skullduggery than for the purpose of ensuring fair elections. And that, I believe, is worth an economic protest.

Not quite. The stated purpose is something else:

until this country has a system in place that ensures fair and verifiable elections.

I'm looking for reality, but I'm just not seeing it in Atrios's call for a boycott. I hope the American boycott isn't based on Ukrainian reality, because that would undermine Ukrainian freedom.

And cheapen reality.

UPDATE: What the hell is wrong with Daily Kos, anyway? At least on the blog's main page, there's no tie-in between Ukrainian election fraud, and Bush's stealing of the election. No boycott. Nothing. Are they trying to be responsible or something? (I must be looking for reality in all the wrong places!)

The downpour delayed my departure, and while I don't have time for one of my usual lengthy posts, I am very concerned about the revolutionary situation in the Ukraine, and I wanted to share a memo from a friend of Ukrainian descent.

He writes (in part):

An acquaintance of mine who is the former U.S. Attorney in the Western District of Washington and a "wheel" in Republican circles offered to convey this modest effort on my part to the proper folks in D.C. on Friday.

Let's hope that Yuschenko emerges victorious. This second wave of falling away from Communism and the Russian orbit (Georgia broke off last year with the "soft" revolt), is the real thing. It must work!

I am sure that better bloggers than I will do a good job of keeping everyone informed. Glenn Reynolds is doing a fantastic job, so if you want more about emerging developments in Ukraine, keep checking in with InstaPundit. As Glenn just observed, the curious WaPo now sees "'business executives who take orders from the state' as a sign of thuggish autocracy!"

(I'm always thankful to see signs of positive change . . .)

HAPPY THANKSGIVING EVERYONE ! !

I'll be out of town, and I don't know whether or when I might manage to post.

(I'm not very good at predicting my life.)

In keeping with the spirit, here's something I haven't Photoshopped. (Wouldn't want to get ahead of myself, eh?)

Anyway, I don't know where it belongs, but I'm sure there are a lot of them lying around somewhere!

Be sure to check out the 114th Carnival of the Vanities, hosted by the very fine blog, Interested-Participant.

Excellent posts all, and I so love Sean Gleeson's Autorantic Virtual Moonbat that I decided to install it here.

Speaking of moonbats, read John Ray's post about a mean law professor with zero sense of humor. (And, as I have noted before, this same professor refuses to discipline students who commit plagiarism.)

More nonsense from academia is spotted by Brian J. Noggle, who blows the whistle on a power grab by librarians seeking criminal sanctions for overdue books!

But, as the Gleeful Extremist shows, there's much dishonesty in education, especially when blue staters tweak the stats.

Enough education about the Carnival.

Please go read the rest of the posts!

In the spirit of the season, I should add that Darleen has an especially good one about Thanksgiving.

(Yes, this is the sorriest post I have ever written. Shame on me.)

Possibly it's because holidays are coming, but I seem to be running out of either steam or gas right now, and I hope it's temporary. (Haven't done today's running yet, and looking out the window at cold wetness does not inspire...)

Considering the importance of Ra^therGate, though, I thought a largely ceremonial observation would be in order.

Lately, I have taken to watching Ra^ther out of morbid curiosity, and last night I did not know he was to announce his resignation until the moment of, er, truth arrived. This is probably my bleeding-heart liberalism showing, but I have to say that I detected in that ra^ther stiff man's voice a distinct breaking, a cracking. Barely detectable as it was, I really think he was as close to crying as it's possible for so public a man to get.

I hesitate to pen a thought such as this, but with the tears of the dead streaming outside, I feel I must confess: I felt sorry for Dan Rather! (Ouch! No, really.)

However, unlike the denizens of this sorry site, I am sorry that I am sorry!

UPDATE: Trying to atone with ra^ther poor Photoshopping:

Sorry again, folks.

This (report on the Ukrainian election sent from Congressman Bob Schaffer) is exciting stuff:

The parliament is meeting now but without the president's supporters or the Communists. After several speeches, they called Yushchenko to the podium to swear him in as the new president (escorted to the podium with guards). The Rada Speaker Litvin walked out. Then the TV station (only one station covers anything about the election and it only covers 30% of the country) went off then cut to news and footage from earlier in the day. This is similar to the revolution in Georgia.

It seems the opposition has now claimed control of the parliament and most likely named Yushchenko as the president. He walked to the podium with a Bible and a copy of the oath in his hand. 300,000 pro-Yushchenko supporters are in the city square and watched what I described above on a jumbo TV. They're celebrating what they believe is their new president. Provocateurs are infiltrating the crowd. Special forces are said to be moving in to disband the crowd. This is now a clearly declared revolutionary effort. A confrontation seems unavoidable now.

It's very tense here. School has been cancled (again) for tomorrow. I'll report more as I learn it.

Now we hear Yushchenko is headed to the city center to address the masses. His lieutenants will be giving instructions to the people outside the Rada building on "what to do."

Telephones in the outlying towns have been shut off.

Now we hear there are Russians in Ukrainian special forces uniforms. I'll report more as I learn it. May God bless and protect Ukraine and her people.

A representative of the Greek Catholic Church (a man who appeared to be a priest -- dressed as one) announced at the demonstration that he was speaking on behalf of the Greek Catholic Churchn the Kyiv Patriarchiat and several Protestant denominations (Lutheran was the only specific one I heard but there were several others). He said this coalition of churches recognizes Yushchenko as president.

Yuschenko is now leading 1 million people from the square and surrounding streets to the administration headquarters of the Ukrainian government. He is in front of the column and many fear he is vulnerable to getting shot. They should be at the steps in 15 mins. Keep in mind, this is where the Russian special forces are stationed, dresses in Ukrainian garb.

If violence comes to define this revolution it will likely be within minutes.

The Georgian President (surrounded by Orthodox priests) just appeared on Ukrainian TV congratulating and encouraging the opposition supporters and "President" Victor Yushchenko. He spoke in Ukrainian which is verysignificant.

The Russian special forces just stopped the crowd approaching the administration headquarters. Bob

Sent via BlackBerry

(Via Glenn Reynolds, who has more, including a statement from Vaclev Havel.)

The presence of the Greek Catholic Church patriarch is highly significant, as in the past, the Orthodox Church worked with the Communists to suppress the Greek Catholics. (This ancient religious schism is highly significant in the Ukrainian nationalist movement, and I have discussed it before here and here.) It should be noted that the Greek Catholic (aka Uniate) Church is in the Western Ukraine, while the Orthodox is in the East. This religious split naturally tends to mirror the election results:

The dispute has split this former Soviet republic down the middle, with the Ukrainian-speaking West mainly behind Yushchenko and the Russian-speaking east backing Yanukovich.

The latest Classical Values poll got me thinking about "original intent" (as well as "original meaning") as opposed to the "living, breathing Constitution" doctrine in Constitutional Law.

While the Eighth Amendment prohibits "cruel and unusual punishment," history shows that the whipping post was a standard punishment at the time of the founding, and George Washington was known to utilize the lash as a matter of routine. Flogging as punishment in the United States did not disappear until comparatively recently; Delaware's whipping post wasn't finally abolished until 1972.

Yet try going to a cocktail party today and advocating a return to the lash. You'll get one of those looks usually reserved for cranks who like to talk about the death of Vincent Foster. Why? Because times have changed, and the law -- even part of the constitution unchanged since the founding -- has changed with them. Social conventions simply do not countenance tying a man to a post and scourging him with the cat-o'nine tails -- for any reason.

But just because times have changed, does that mean logic has changed with them? I have asked a number of people whether they'd rather be sentenced to five years in prison or receive 100 lashes. The answer is almost always the lash. That's because, even though 100 lashes would be very painful and would leave heavy, permanent scars, the suffering would be mostly over in a month, whereas five years is five years, and worse things can happen in prison than a scarred back. Logic, however, is lost where it comes to prevailing social conventions.

Sodomy laws were once as standard as the lash, although the lash has a much longer tradition. In that respect, the lash is more traditional than "traditional" sodomy laws. Why, the lash is downright classical. Sodomy laws are more modern.

Not that I'm advocating the lash, of course. (Or the sodomy laws, although getting rid of them by judicial fiat seems to have transformed them magically from anti-heterosexual into anti-homosexual laws, thus transforming sodomites into homosexuals.)

I'm just wondering about living and breathing documents and the moral absurdity which can result from simple attempts at logic.

Ditto drug morality. As M. Simon reminded me (indirectly, by means of an earlier comment) we tend to think it is immoral to medicate emotional pain, but absolutely moral to medicate physical pain. (M. Simon's thoughts here.) Yet when anesthesia was first invented, many doctors refused to use it lest it damage their patients' "moral character." This strikes us as absurd today.

But what if they were just as right (or just as wrong) as those who believe it immoral to medicate emotional pain? After all, pain is mostly emotional anyway, which is why narcotics work so well. Emotional pain is generally agreed upon to be worse than physical pain. Are these moral distinctions not more than a bit arbitrary -- even in American culture? Back in the good old days before drug laws (pre-1914), society had failed to make much of a moral distinction between the medication of emotional pain and the medication of physical pain, so it never occurred to anyone that one was "good" and the other "bad." Certainly not enough to criminalize one while legalizing the other. What changed? Did the use of anesthesia in surgery have something to do with this cultural shift? For the many centuries before modern anesthesia, there was no practical way to avoid pain entirely, and certainly no one would have thought about it in terms of a patient's "right." Sure, they had opiates like laudanum, but like all narcotics, that only helps one cope with pain by dulling the emotions; it could never be used successfully in, say, an amputation. Laudanum would provide some relief, but the orderlies would still have to hold down the screaming, struggling patient. Once anesthesia (whether general or local) allowed the worst pain to be escaped entirely, we entered into a new world where the absence of pain was -- or at least seemed -- possible.

And, possibly, immoral. I suspect that in the half century or so between the mainstream use of anthesthia and the passage of the 1914 Harrison Narcotics Act, morality had