From The Progressive Review
FROM OUR OVERSTOCKED ARCHIVES
SAM SMITH - Why do so many of the people who talk about "intellectual property" not seem all that bright? On precisely what date and under what circumstances did an advertising jingle for a new type of tampon become "intellectual property?' When I was writing my last book, I had to write for permissions. When I asked for permission to quote Woody Guthrie's "This Land is Your Land," the venerable Ludlow Music Co. took care of the matter in a page and a half. When I wanted to quote from a book, the venerable University of Chicago Press worked its way through the problem in one long page. When I wanted to quote eight words from a Mac Davis song, however, I got a letter from some big LA law firm wanting a synopsis of the book, a copy of the chapter of the book in which it would be quoted, as well as all future earnings of my first-born son. I decided to write my own intellectual property.
I meet a lot of process people in Washington. They're like vehicles without a drive belt. They make a lot of noise; they just can't go anywhere. Getting things done is now a radical act.
Then there are the virtual people. They only exist as images of themselves. Talking to one of them is like watching a bad cable show without a zapper.
Some scientists believe that at the rate things are going, process people and virtual people will eventually evolve into species reproductively incompatible with the rest of us.
There are already reports of process people and real people mating and producing only sterile offspring -- a sort of mule that understands all the main policy points.
I read that the 200 richest people in the world have a combined wealth greater than the GDP of each country in the world except for five. If we are going to have this sort of thing, it may be worthwhile thinking about reviving feudalism. At least under that system, the elite had some social responsibilities. And manners.
Many reporters aren't reporters anymore; they're just semiotic sharecroppers on some corporate plantation.
Why is it safer to say "fuck" than to say "fascism?" One of the curiosities of post-cold-war rhetoric is that we no longer have a term for those who practice ideologies antithetical to democracy. According to our leaders there are really only two political choices any more: free market economies and those busily converting to this state of grace. Current American foreign policy seems aimed at turning incompetent communists into competent fascists.
Sometimes I stand in an airport bookstore and try to figure why God decided to reveal all of life's mysteries in such a place. Why didn't God make philosophers and theologians and poets as all-knowing as MBAs?
The average American is subjected to 3,000 commercial messages a day. If you have a good day, a half dozen people will tell you a truth worth remembering. Thus the lies win out 500 to one.
We've got too many people in this country employed trying to prevent other people from being bad and not enough people employed helping other people to be good.
Polls are the way the media ascertains how well we have learned what it has taught us.
We don't have to worry about Trojan horses much any more. The real danger comes from Trojan words and phrases -- appealing statues of rhetoric concealing the enemy.
What's the difference between believing in UFOs and believing in the flawless efficacy of the marketplace? Probably where the believer went to college.
There is actually a lot more superstition in Washington than elsewhere in the country -- if superstition means believing something for which there is little or no proof. Of course, a cynic might say that Washington only preaches superstition; it doesn't really believe in it.
Even anarchy is being institutionalized these days, witness an article in the New York Times that declared the Countess Muriel Brandolini D'Adda to be "that newly minted American arbiter of haute-bohemian chic."
In Washington, however, mere ex cathedra declarations aren't enough. You have to back them up with "unassailable data." Thus, it was not surprising to hear from that long minted American arbiter of bas-bohemian chic, post-romanesque architect John Wiebenson, of two women overheard conversing thusly:
"That's a really funky place."
"Exactly how funky is it?"
We need a trial to judge all those who bear significant responsibility for the 20th century -- the most murderous and ecologically destructive in human history. We could call it the war, air and fiscal crimes tribunal and we could put politicians and CEOs and major media owners in the dock with earphones like Eichmann and make them listen to the evidence of how they killed millions of people and almost murdered the planet and made most of us far more miserable than we needed to be. Of course, we wouldn't have time to go after them one by one. We'd have to lump Wall Street investment bankers in one trial, the Council on Foreign Relations in another, and any remaining Harvard Business School or Yale Law graduates in a third. We don't need this for retribution, only for edification. So there would be no capital punishment, but rather banishment to an overseas Nike factory with a vow of perpetual silence.
I believe in a modified version of the end-of-history theory, namely that most good combinations of foods have already been discovered. Thus ordering mahi-mahi baked in blueberry jam with a sawdust glaze is probably not a good idea.
A news conference is a device by which the establishment keeps large numbers of reporters from covering the news every place else.
If you want to complain about anonymous sources in journalism, is it okay to quote "leading experts" in order to bolster your case?
Any elite that talks endlessly about the challenges of the first half of the 21st century and then forgets to put the year 2000 into their computer programs should be asked to resign.
Back in the 1960s you weren't meant to trust anyone over 30. Today, it's probably best to be wary of anyone within a standard deviation of Sidney Blumenthal's age.
Ecologist Donella Meadows, points out that if a water lily doubling in size each day could eventually cover a pond in 30 days, half that growth would occur on the 29th day. Do you know what day it is for the earth?
We pledge allegiance to the republic for which America stands and not to its empire for which it is now suffering.
Why does the media always refer to people defending our civil liberties and the Constitution as "activists" or "advocates?" Wouldn't "citizens" do just as well?
Some day our leaders may again be as good as our firefighters.
BOOKSHELF
DOMINION OF WAR
Empire and Liberty in North America, 1500-2000
Fred Anderson and Andrew Cayton
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0670033707/progressiverevieA/
Americans often think of their nation’s history as a movement toward ever-greater democracy, equality, and freedom. Wars in this story are understood both as necessary to defend those values and as exceptions to the rule of peaceful progress. In The Dominion of War, historians Fred Anderson and Andrew Cayton reinterpret the development of the United States, arguing instead that war has played a leading role in shaping North America from the sixteenth century to the present.Anderson and Cayton bring their sweeping narrative to life by structuring it around the lives of eight men - Samuel de Champlain, William Penn, George Washington, Andrew Jackson, Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna, Ulysses S. Grant, Douglas MacArthur, and Colin Powell.
This approach enables them to describe great events in concrete terms and to illuminate critical connections between often-forgotten imperial conflicts, such as the Seven Years’ War and the Mexican-American War, and better-known events such as the War of Independence and the Civil War. The result is a provocative, highly readable account of the ways in which republic and empire have coexisted in American history as two faces of the same coin. The Dominion of War recasts familiar triumphs as tragedies, proposes an unconventional set of turning points, and depicts imperialism and republicanism as inseparable influences in a pattern of development in which war and freedom have long been intertwined. It offers a new perspective on America’s attempts to define its role in the world at the dawn of the twenty-first century.
FURTHERMORE. . .
TORTURE MEDIA DISSECTOR - Vanity Fair is reporting that "sexual and physical abuse of Iraqi prisoners continued at least three months after the Abu Ghraib scandal was revealed. . . " Iraqi inmates were sexually assaulted, beaten, administered electric shocks and kept in cages or crates, states a report in the magazine based on 60 hours of interviews with 10 former inmates including a 15-year-old boy. Writer Donovan Webster quotes an inmate saying he was hung naked from handcuffs in a frigid room while soldiers threw buckets of ice water on him.
http://tinyurl.com/64kc7
SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE ON LABOR SPLIT
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=
/chronicle/archive/2004/12/25/BUGU2AG0H31.DTL
SAM SMITH - Why do so many of the people who talk about "intellectual property" not seem all that bright? On precisely what date and under what circumstances did an advertising jingle for a new type of tampon become "intellectual property?' When I was writing my last book, I had to write for permissions. When I asked for permission to quote Woody Guthrie's "This Land is Your Land," the venerable Ludlow Music Co. took care of the matter in a page and a half. When I wanted to quote from a book, the venerable University of Chicago Press worked its way through the problem in one long page. When I wanted to quote eight words from a Mac Davis song, however, I got a letter from some big LA law firm wanting a synopsis of the book, a copy of the chapter of the book in which it would be quoted, as well as all future earnings of my first-born son. I decided to write my own intellectual property.
I meet a lot of process people in Washington. They're like vehicles without a drive belt. They make a lot of noise; they just can't go anywhere. Getting things done is now a radical act.
Then there are the virtual people. They only exist as images of themselves. Talking to one of them is like watching a bad cable show without a zapper.
Some scientists believe that at the rate things are going, process people and virtual people will eventually evolve into species reproductively incompatible with the rest of us.
There are already reports of process people and real people mating and producing only sterile offspring -- a sort of mule that understands all the main policy points.
I read that the 200 richest people in the world have a combined wealth greater than the GDP of each country in the world except for five. If we are going to have this sort of thing, it may be worthwhile thinking about reviving feudalism. At least under that system, the elite had some social responsibilities. And manners.
Many reporters aren't reporters anymore; they're just semiotic sharecroppers on some corporate plantation.
Why is it safer to say "fuck" than to say "fascism?" One of the curiosities of post-cold-war rhetoric is that we no longer have a term for those who practice ideologies antithetical to democracy. According to our leaders there are really only two political choices any more: free market economies and those busily converting to this state of grace. Current American foreign policy seems aimed at turning incompetent communists into competent fascists.
Sometimes I stand in an airport bookstore and try to figure why God decided to reveal all of life's mysteries in such a place. Why didn't God make philosophers and theologians and poets as all-knowing as MBAs?
The average American is subjected to 3,000 commercial messages a day. If you have a good day, a half dozen people will tell you a truth worth remembering. Thus the lies win out 500 to one.
We've got too many people in this country employed trying to prevent other people from being bad and not enough people employed helping other people to be good.
Polls are the way the media ascertains how well we have learned what it has taught us.
We don't have to worry about Trojan horses much any more. The real danger comes from Trojan words and phrases -- appealing statues of rhetoric concealing the enemy.
What's the difference between believing in UFOs and believing in the flawless efficacy of the marketplace? Probably where the believer went to college.
There is actually a lot more superstition in Washington than elsewhere in the country -- if superstition means believing something for which there is little or no proof. Of course, a cynic might say that Washington only preaches superstition; it doesn't really believe in it.
Even anarchy is being institutionalized these days, witness an article in the New York Times that declared the Countess Muriel Brandolini D'Adda to be "that newly minted American arbiter of haute-bohemian chic."
In Washington, however, mere ex cathedra declarations aren't enough. You have to back them up with "unassailable data." Thus, it was not surprising to hear from that long minted American arbiter of bas-bohemian chic, post-romanesque architect John Wiebenson, of two women overheard conversing thusly:
"That's a really funky place."
"Exactly how funky is it?"
We need a trial to judge all those who bear significant responsibility for the 20th century -- the most murderous and ecologically destructive in human history. We could call it the war, air and fiscal crimes tribunal and we could put politicians and CEOs and major media owners in the dock with earphones like Eichmann and make them listen to the evidence of how they killed millions of people and almost murdered the planet and made most of us far more miserable than we needed to be. Of course, we wouldn't have time to go after them one by one. We'd have to lump Wall Street investment bankers in one trial, the Council on Foreign Relations in another, and any remaining Harvard Business School or Yale Law graduates in a third. We don't need this for retribution, only for edification. So there would be no capital punishment, but rather banishment to an overseas Nike factory with a vow of perpetual silence.
I believe in a modified version of the end-of-history theory, namely that most good combinations of foods have already been discovered. Thus ordering mahi-mahi baked in blueberry jam with a sawdust glaze is probably not a good idea.
A news conference is a device by which the establishment keeps large numbers of reporters from covering the news every place else.
If you want to complain about anonymous sources in journalism, is it okay to quote "leading experts" in order to bolster your case?
Any elite that talks endlessly about the challenges of the first half of the 21st century and then forgets to put the year 2000 into their computer programs should be asked to resign.
Back in the 1960s you weren't meant to trust anyone over 30. Today, it's probably best to be wary of anyone within a standard deviation of Sidney Blumenthal's age.
Ecologist Donella Meadows, points out that if a water lily doubling in size each day could eventually cover a pond in 30 days, half that growth would occur on the 29th day. Do you know what day it is for the earth?
We pledge allegiance to the republic for which America stands and not to its empire for which it is now suffering.
Why does the media always refer to people defending our civil liberties and the Constitution as "activists" or "advocates?" Wouldn't "citizens" do just as well?
Some day our leaders may again be as good as our firefighters.
BOOKSHELF
DOMINION OF WAR
Empire and Liberty in North America, 1500-2000
Fred Anderson and Andrew Cayton
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0670033707/progressiverevieA/
Americans often think of their nation’s history as a movement toward ever-greater democracy, equality, and freedom. Wars in this story are understood both as necessary to defend those values and as exceptions to the rule of peaceful progress. In The Dominion of War, historians Fred Anderson and Andrew Cayton reinterpret the development of the United States, arguing instead that war has played a leading role in shaping North America from the sixteenth century to the present.Anderson and Cayton bring their sweeping narrative to life by structuring it around the lives of eight men - Samuel de Champlain, William Penn, George Washington, Andrew Jackson, Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna, Ulysses S. Grant, Douglas MacArthur, and Colin Powell.
This approach enables them to describe great events in concrete terms and to illuminate critical connections between often-forgotten imperial conflicts, such as the Seven Years’ War and the Mexican-American War, and better-known events such as the War of Independence and the Civil War. The result is a provocative, highly readable account of the ways in which republic and empire have coexisted in American history as two faces of the same coin. The Dominion of War recasts familiar triumphs as tragedies, proposes an unconventional set of turning points, and depicts imperialism and republicanism as inseparable influences in a pattern of development in which war and freedom have long been intertwined. It offers a new perspective on America’s attempts to define its role in the world at the dawn of the twenty-first century.
FURTHERMORE. . .
TORTURE MEDIA DISSECTOR - Vanity Fair is reporting that "sexual and physical abuse of Iraqi prisoners continued at least three months after the Abu Ghraib scandal was revealed. . . " Iraqi inmates were sexually assaulted, beaten, administered electric shocks and kept in cages or crates, states a report in the magazine based on 60 hours of interviews with 10 former inmates including a 15-year-old boy. Writer Donovan Webster quotes an inmate saying he was hung naked from handcuffs in a frigid room while soldiers threw buckets of ice water on him.
http://tinyurl.com/64kc7
SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE ON LABOR SPLIT
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=
/chronicle/archive/2004/12/25/BUGU2AG0H31.DTL
posted by T. Scott Brineman at 8:29 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home