/|\

“Where they have burned books, they will end in burning human beings.”


Saturday, February 17, 2007

KKK On the Rise Due to Immigration

According to the ADL and Southern Poverty Law Center:

While the numbers still are small, the Southern Poverty Law center says between 2000 and 2005, hate groups increased by 33 percent, with Klan chapters growing 63 percent. Adding to membership, says a new report by the Anti-Defamation League, is exploitation of national debates over gay marriage and urban crime.

Well, everything old is new again. I wonder how much of this is also tied to the fact that a lot of those Latino immigrants are Catholic, too. Watching Gangs of New York, I swear it was like deja vu with the anti-immigrant rhetoric by Bill the Butcher.

|

posted by Mary, 3:15 PM

Heliocentrism is a Conspiracy.
I'm Pretty Sure Gravity is Too.
At Least, I Wish It Was

You've probably seen this already, but if you haven't, get ready for a laugh:

AUSTIN – [Texas--Mary] House Appropriations Chairman Warren Chisum said Wednesday that he's "willing to apologize" for giving colleagues a document that contains what the Anti-Defamation League called "outrageous anti-Semitic material."

"The stuff that causes conflicts between religious beliefs, you know, I'd never be a party to that," Mr. Chisum said. "I'm willing to apologize if I've offended anyone."

What's he apologizing for? Circulating a memo from Georgia rep Ben Bridges which claims that "Pharisaic evolutionism" and heliocentrism (the idea that the earth goes around the sun) are Jewish conspiracies influenced by Kabala in order to destroy Christianity.

Of course, the fact that Copernicus was a Polish priest doesn't seem to bother these guys. (Wait till they find out Jesus was a Jew killed by the Roman state.)

The memo is in support of a website called Fixed Earth, which basically spews the usual Jewish/Atheist conspiracy crap, and dabbles in anti-Catholicism for embracing "Copernicanism." I haven't bothered to read up what they say about John Paul II embracing evolution, but I'm pretty sure they'd get the vapors.

The Antisemitism and anti-evolutionism isn't new, but damn--I never thought they'd be stupid enough to reject heliocentrism. What next--the earth is flat?

|

posted by Mary, 3:15 PM


Thursday, February 15, 2007

Speaking of Lost Countries...

So Greenland's Norse settlement lasted 450-500 years. This is actually a significant amount of time; Germany as a nation-state is less than 150 years old, the U.S. only 225 or so, and much of the Middle East less than 100. The nation-states of China or England are exceptions to the rule--and even then, there is debate as to the extent England exists as a nation-state, subsummed yet dominant in the U.K.

Where am I going with this? There was a curious op-ed in the New York Times, which detailed how Arnold Schwartzenegger is governing California as a quasi-nation; one good example is an accord reached between California and Britain regarding the environment and pollution.

Granted, this isn't so odd, and actually hearkens back to how states thought of themselves in the antebellum period. On the other hand, it's an interesting possible break with the U.S. The gist of the op-ed is that the United States is too large to be governable as a meaningful democracy (see below for what I think of that), and the eventual break-up of the nation--or at least break-away of some states--is probably inevitable.

Is it? There's no way to put a date on it, but of course it's inevitable. All things fall apart eventually. But what interests me is the question of whether this is a relatively-soon phenomenon, and if so, why?

There are a lot of issues at work here: first, California has the fifth-highest GDP in the world. Secondly, there's water issues--California apparently takes a lot of water from neighboring states. And then there's always the wild card of demographics, in this case California's growing Latino population, which might be happier not attached to a U.S. that's unfortunately (and hopefully temporarily) hostile to them.

At any rate, just speculation.

|

posted by Mary, 3:15 PM

WHAT?!?

Milton Street, notoriously corrupt brother of Philadelphia's current mayor John Street, is running for mayor of the city. Of course, the fact that he's under federal indictment, has a long history of scheming and taking advantage of Philadelphia's long-corrupt politics, and of apparently living in Jersey, doesn't seem to bother Mr. Street.

Well, Philadelphia's been corrupt since 1683--why stop now?

|

posted by Mary, 3:00 PM

Remember Greenland!

Why, when I was taught about the discovery of America--that is, the "western" half of the planet--was I not taught that the first European settlements were in Greenland?

Now, I grew up in the 1980s/1990s, so I was taught about Vikings in Canada and the failed settlement there. However, the Norse were already in Greenland a generation or so before Vinland, and stayed for nearly 500 years. Why isn't this considered the earliest European settlement? Why wait until the Spanish, French and English show up? The Norse had been here long before, yet there's nothing really said.

I ask this, because Greeland is obviously part of the North American continent area. Iceland is a whole other issue, because it's not part of any continental shelf, being only 20 million years old (i.e., it's really young). Whether or not Iceland should be brought up, given how close it is to Greeland and far from Europe is a whole other issue.

This Norse settlements in Greenland were there longer than the Anglo settlements in Canada and the U.S.--we've only been here maybe 400 years (give or take with the Lost Colony). If for some reason (unlikely) Anglos abandoned the continent, would its settlements be deemed irrelevant?

Just something that's been bothering me.

|

posted by Mary, 6:30 PM

Requiem for the DJ,
for the hardware store
for the coffeeshop.

Here in Philadelphia, the local NPR station has a two hour morning talk show Radio Times. I guess I've been listening since high school (well, when I was home sick anyway). Anyway, Tuesday they had on a program about media consolidation. This has been a sore point with me, ever since I was a teenager and Philadelphia lost its alternative station thanks to the Communications Act of 1996--one year later, Philly was out another rock station. We've also lost our classical music, talk, jazz, and all but one rock station. The majority of stations are a couple of good R&B stations, and a lot of crappy "hits" stations, and almost none of them seem to have local DJs--they're programmed by computers, with the same voice going out over the country, playing the same songs everywhere. Commercial radio, it's a vortex.

There are some bright spots: WMMR is still holding on, and they'll probably have to carry Pierre Robert away on a stretcher before he gives up on radio. WOGL's format is changing--they no longer play stuff from the 1950s (you have to go to AM for that)--but they still have local DJs going back to the 1950s, and still play doowop on Sunday nights. WMGK's classic rock schtick is kind of old, but at least the DJs are local and responding to

College radio is still OK--WPRB is still the best place to go for new and original music, and WXPN, despite the annoying AOR feel, still has DJs who'll play both new and classic stuff.

Where am I going with this? Two places. First, my dream job would be to be a DJ. I was one in college, and it was some of the most fun I had that didn't involve going to a bar. I even would get up early and do a morning show--and I'm not a morning person. I loved going on the air, choosing the songs, getting feedback from listeners. It was like making a new mix tape every week.

But here's the more important thing: the consolidation of media is dangerous for a democratic society. It's the Walmart principle--when Walmart comes in, the independent stores board up, and the only equivalent job in town is found at Walmart. The market becomes homogenized and local diversity is slowly destroyed. Now, I'm not an idealist--working for a small business (which I've done) isn't wonderful and isn't some Edenic or egalitarian situation. But neither is working for Walmart, and only when you have a nation of independent workers and business owners do you have a daily reinforcement of the concept of individuality. When one company runs everything, the worker has less incentive.

The same goes for local media. Sometimes it does a lot of harm--look at the Southern newspapers and their decision not to write about--or even write against--the Civil Rights movement. But at least the local media is representative of the population, and better captures the local news. When it comes to entertainment, when one media company provides the entertainment, it's harder for the little guy to be heard. When you have lots of local DJs or TV stations, you have a more diverse field of entertainment, but more importantly, you have more people getting involved in creating and disseminating the entertainment.

Why is this important? A good example is the Catholic sex scandals covered in the Boston Globe. Originally it was a local story, but it gained national attention, and eventually international, to the point that communities around the world--not only the U.S., but Ireland, Poland, etc.--have had to acknowledge the systemic cover-up of abuse.

You don't get this type of reporting from a news wire.

You can't buy Hex signs at Walmart, either.

Local radio used to be able to break a band. Now, you're lucky if someone links to you on MySpace.

There's also the nearly-defunct concept of the airwaves as public--they're a naturally thing, unlike cable or satellite radio. This is why the FCC had regulated that a certain amount of time has to be set aside for public affairs, whether that's a political debate or the weather alert system. Either way, ideally the airwaves and TV stations are ultimately responsible to the public--not to a small group of shareholders.

Here's the thing--companies like Walmart, Clear Channel, the Gap, Starbucks, Barnes & Noble--what they do is dismantle local culture. It enforces--even passively--the idea that everyone has the same tastes--and you should too. It's like always being in high school, never college.

Moreover, they don't serve the public at all, but only the shareholders, whose interests--i.e. maximizing profits--are often at odds with the community using the company.

What this does is damage democracy. I'm not saying this is some conscious conspiracy or anything. I doubt democracy or the functioning of society is on the minds of these CEOs. In some cases, they even try to do good--like Starbucks with their fair trade coffee. But the companies, by consolidating through mergers, by getting rid of local competition, damages the community by allowing, and sometimes even forcing, the people to accept a feudalist system where the people work and shop at the same company--entire communities become dependent on one large company (like Walmart) to employ a significant population.

Of course, this isn't the companies' or even the government's faults entirely, but also that of the people. We give the power to these companies, we patronize them, in part because of cost, and in part out of sheer laziness. It's easier and cheaper to shop at Walmart than to work at or even own your own hardware store or grocery.

It's a complicated issue. I'd love to be a DJ. Or own my own bookstore. But it's hard--if not impossible--to get a gig, or to afford the cost of starting up a store. Even worse, to compete with the big chains.

|

posted by Mary, 6:30 PM


Thursday, February 14, 2007

Happy Valentine's Day

And a big Happy V-Day to my husband Dennis Lingg, who drew me a wonderful card, and took care of me after I threw out my back on Monday night.

I'm so lucky :)

|

posted by Mary, 11:30 PM