Unity08

Growing a Third Party - David Broder, WaPo

While I appreciate the attention someone like Broder gives to the idea of a third party he's asking the wrong questions. He does note the selection process that Unity08 is presenting:
In a few weeks, they will outline provisional rules for their own nomination process, determining how candidates will qualify and how the voting will be conducted. The goal is to pick either a political independent for president or to form a ticket with both a Democrat and a Republican. Feedback will be welcomed before the rules are made final, he said.
But Broder doesn't dwell too long on this idea or even go into greater detail. Basically, the article is simply a cover piece of Unity08, bringing it into the public consciousness. Beyond that, there's nothing more. I would expect something better from a pundit like Broder but there you go.

My personal take is that something like Unity08 doesn't bring anything new to the table. Sure, it's a novel idea but it doesn't actually attempt to solve the problems of partisanship or getting genuine candidates elected. And to shoot for the biggest prize of all in politics, the presidency, when you have little to no public acceptance is absolute folly. It's a sure way to loose a lot of money and reinforce the idea that a viable third party will never be had. Now someone like Ross Perot was able to parlay his presidential run into a wider party. And the Greens and Libertarians have become mainstays on public ballots. But none of these parties are actually trying to change the way a party works. In order to make any serious gains as a third party you must break into the system first. But this is a Catch-22. If you can't get yourself elected then there's little chance of you changing the way the political system works. And if you can't change the way the system works then you can't open it up for future parties. So, the solution is, instead of breaking into the system, you must break the system. Aiming for the presidency first isn't the way to build a party, visibility perhaps, but not a party. To build a party you have to break into the local councils, state houses and school boards. The ways elections are held are primarily determined by the states, not the federal government. To break the system you have to start from the ground up. So something like Unity08 is a non-starter and while Broder doesn't come out and say it, the tone of his piece suggests that.

Equal Parts

Let's Dialogue - Matt Yglesias

I do so love the pundits who like to trot out the fascist analogies and predictions of an on-set of neo-fascism. It shows a basic misunderstanding of what fascism is and was. If anything, one would expect to see European Muslims, not Christian Europeans, mimicking fascism. Fascism, in one sense was a virulent form of ultra-nationalism. But even in that case you wouldn't see a true fascism arise. Fascism, at its heart, was the sacralization of politics, the turning of the state into God. It's not the same as a theocracy, even if in action they look similar. But that's like saying the common cold and Eboli are the same since they are both viruses that can kill us. Fascism does not equal communism or a theocratic government. Yes, all share elements of totalitarianism but that does not make them the same thing. It's this kind of fast-and-loose punditry that worries me since it represents a lack of appreciation for some of the most dangerous ideologies of our time.

Napping Our Way to Victory

Study: Napping Regularly Fights Heart Disease - WaPo

I've long touted the benefits of naps. I regularly take a nap after work and it has proven quite refreshing after a long day. More to the point, during the heady days of thesis writing naps were an essential part of the process as by the middle of the afternoon my brain was feeling a bit mushy. Just a twenty or thirty minute nap can keep you going for a lot longer than something like an energy drink can. It's just a matter of letting the body and the mind rest for a moment.

Zune Zune Zune

Jobs seeks online music shake up - BBC

This first popped up on the Inquirer a couple of days ago, but the BBC has picked up on this now. Apparently the recording industry is on the verge of ditching their DRM schemes as it has begun to drag down online music sales. After conducting a brief experiment where DRM-free mp3 files were placed against the standard DRM files it was found that consumers preferred the DRM-less ones. No big surprise there. But even the mere idea that the RIAA would consider dropping anti-piracy schemes like DRM is a surprise. What I find more amusing about this situation is all of the grief Microsoft has received over its own built-in DRM in Vista. For Microsoft, DRM has become something of a black hole as it has caused a lot of driver problems, particularly with companies like nVidia and ATI. From what I can gather, each new graphics card will need its own independent driver. This goes against the philosophy of both ATI and nVidia who have sought only unified drivers as a means of keeping everything simplified. Vista's DRM prevents the use of unified drivers and thus will slow the adoption of new graphics cards, thus pissing off the gamer class. When you piss off the gamers you lose a good chunk of the market.
In a roundabout way, the RIAA will have screwed Microsoft if they do ditch DRM. More importantly, they will have given Microsoft's most visible competitor, Apple, a huge victory in the music market. With Microsoft's own homegrown player Zune just now getting on its feet, such a move on the RIAA's part would throw their whole game plan into a top hat.

"Breathing Room"

I've heard a lot of talk over the last year or so about the apparent lack of options between political parties. And I've heard a great deal of dissatisfaction over the current state of our government from moderates, Republicans, Democrats, you name it. By now, I'm sure you know where this is all heading--we need a new political party. I want to start a new party, the Realist Party, in an attempt to do what our current political leaders won't do and what our current political machines can't do. I think a good part of the problem with our party system derives from the fact that the framers of the Constitution never incorporated a party system into the document. I'm not hear to asses fault for that omission, it was well over two hundred years ago and we've had more than a few big events occur in the interim. The party machines we have now are the product of decades of campaigning and governing and however they originally started is not the issue, or at least not the whole issue.
So the methods by which we elect candiates is broken. Not that our votes are not counted (barring some notable cases) and it isn't as if who gets elected radically differs from what the continuing stream of polling numbers say (again, barring a few notable exceptions). What I mean when I say that our electorial system is broken is that the way candiates are chosen, presented and campaigned is broken. Too often we see only the candiates who can win and rarely the candiate who should win. And too often do we see candidates who selectively target a certain audience in their district to the disadvantage of everyone else, whether that is their electorial base or special interest groups.
But I recoil at the suggestion that we should legislate our ways out of this mess. Even discounting the pratical obstacles of forcing those who's political careers depend on the current electorial system to change it, I don't think this is necessarily a legislative problem. What I am suggesting is that if a genuine third party can rise up based on the idea of presenting candidates who should get elected, holding elected officials to a higher standard of intelligence and conduct, and limiting the amount of vitrol spilled by the punditry then we can repair the electorial machine. While all of this sounds very high minded I do believe it is not only possible, but greatly desired.
What such a party takes to exist, much like any party or any business for that matter, is a lot of hard work, committed people and money. The difference lies in the purpose behind these elements. It isn't that the means are wrong or even the ends are wrong. It's the intent that is wrong. The purpose of most political machines is to get people elected, naturally. You can't hope to change things as an elected official if you can't become an elected official. But when the sole purpose of a political machine is to get people elected then you see the depth of our problem.
So what we are left with is the dilemma of any third party--how can you attain a sufficient number of people in elected office to effect real change without becoming just as broken as the other two major parties? I'm willing to take suggestions.

Lazarus

So I'm going to revive this blog after letting lie fallow for over a year. Check back here later to see what, if anything, I have done.

Opal City

Gaudi

Much like Robinson's "Starman" series, Lapham's "City of Crime" in Detective Comics and even Neil Gaiman's "Neverwhere", Grant Morrison's uses the city itself as a key character in his writing. Not only does his current "Manhatten Guardian" series play up the idea of the city as a living breathing organism but his "The Invisibles" uses it as a vital theme to introduce the series. "Starman" in particular uses the city not just as a setting but as motive force for the actions of its characters. While "Starman" does share the sense of sheer awe over modern archtecture that "The Manhatten Guardian" does, both "City of Crime" and "Neverwhere" play around with the thriving city beneath the city as does "The Guardian" as well.

General Amnesty

Blah blah blah, required apology for absence, blah blah blah, too bored, too busy, too annoyed, blah blah blah, you'll all be against the wall when the revolution comes, blah blah blah

China, Japan and the Historical Narrative

Textbook

The protests and rioting in China is one of the clearest examples of the need for proper representation of history. While you cannot over-dramatize the events, no matter how harsh the event might be, you cannot marginalize or mitigate the event either. The Japan that produced such horrors as the 'rape of Nanking' is not the same Japan of today. Even so, recognition of one's past is the only way to prevent repeating that past. The difficulty, especially in the case of grade school textbooks, is in how the meaning of the event is conveyed. History is as much a narrative as any novel, the only difference being that historical narrative is based in evidence. But the meaning and impact of that evidence is a part of the narrative. When the evidence is given little attention or otherwise shuffled off to the side, the meaning is changed. Our own past of action against the Native Americans is representative of such marginalization in history.

Genres

Sin City

It's hard to get people, especially adults, to understand that comic books can be more than just four-color superheros and pirate tales. While most of the market is still dominated by the superheros there are many other tales that don't feature brightly-clothed and moralistic heroes as the main characters. Frank Miller started out in superhero comics with Daredevil and Batman and after making his mark on the field he moved on to tell a story that he always wanted to write. Neil Gaiman was allowed to write a comic book that has become a highlight for those, like me, who argue that comics are a genuine and worthwhile literary genre. Alan Moore, Grant Morrison, Brian Vaughan and others all represent comic writers who both can write a good superhero tale as well as stories that go well beyond that sub-genre.

The Splintering of the Right

Process Conservatives

It amazes me how quickly the Republican party violated their own traditional platform of state's rights in order to promote the right to life. This case is about quality of life and no matter what the radical conservatives claim, they are playing political football with a woman's life. More than that, the Republicans have also derailed any agenda to push a gay marrage ban and their own anti-abortion plans. By forcefully stepping into a state's rights issue the Republicans jettisoned a fundamental tenet of their party. Additionally, the previous platform that advocated smaller, less intrusive government, as well as the belief that people know best how to live their lives, is no longer viable. What I find amusing, if one can be amused in this grotesque charade, is that by departing from the Lockean idea that the individual knows best how to live their life, the Republicans has attachted themselves to the Rousseauean idea that the government has a right to dictate how one should live. That very same idea was later taken up by such illustrious figures as Marx, Lenin, Mao and Stalin, not to mention Hitler and Mussolini. So either the Republicans have decided their party will now become a socialist party or they have indeed turned toward a fascist-style of government.

The Return of Conservative Philosophy

Wolfowitz and the World Bank

My question, in light of Bush's resistance to cooperate with the European powers in terms of global politics and economics, is when will the EU take a hard-line stance with the U.S.? The members of the World Bank could refuse to accept Wolfowitz's nomination and curry some favor with the anti-World Bank groups, however small that might be. Still, I'm not concerned with Bush's administration hailing a new age of fascism. That is, until they start talking about 'transvaluation' or a cultural revolution. More to the point, while the majority of Americans are on the right side of moderate, they are not necessarily as rabidly rightist as most Republican commentators would have you believe. The radical conservatives can only take this so far before the people get nervous.

Planet Heist

Adam Strange

Another comic that takes aim at the whole 'decompression' style of writing. It's pure candy with visuals incredibly well done on both the part of the artist and the colorist and inker. I'm just waiting for Diggle's "The Losers" to be optioned for a movie.

God is Red

Atomika

Something about modernism, technology and the twentieth century that just gets me all frisky.

Rocks and Other Places

Loaded Language

I think President Bush is about to encounter a problem of his own creation: his own touted simplicity. President Bush's plan for Social Security reform is already facing an uphill battle from opponents in both parties and from the American public. The problem Bush is facing is that his plan is not simple and cannot be effectively conveyed or understood through simple language. Social Security reform is a big, complex problem and in order for Bush to make any headway he will have to abandon his badge of simplicity. Unfortunately, Bush has so surrounded himself with this aura of simplicity that any move away from it will complicate things for both him and the Republican party. Reality has a habit of breaking down the door and wrecking up the place if it is ignored for too long.

Guy Fawkes Day

V for Vendetta

I do hope the film adaptation does this graphic novel justice. But what interests me more at this moment is not the book "V for Vendetta" or even Rich Johnston's commentary. What interests me are the comments posted by the readers of Newsarama. Perhaps its the academic in me but the commentors who at least did not actively disagree with Rich did have some good arguments with evidence to base their claims on. I like evidence and live by the rules of evidence. In fact, all of the sciences, both hard and soft, live by the rules of evidence. They have done so for a few thousand years or so. What deeply disturbs me are the comments posted by those who disagreed with Mr. Johnston. Those comments consistantly lacked the evidence to support their arguments. I don't care who you are or what your politics are; if you don't ground your arguments then I am not going to waste my time. Those who argue without providing sufficient evidence or reason are simply propagandists.

Young Crooks of Texas

Pro Libertas - Pro Texana

What scares me about the Young Conservatives is not that there exists a group of people committed to promoting their views and shaping politics to fit their perceived needs. What scares me is there exists a group of people committed to destroying the values of the United States in the name of American values. A country built on immigration and they hate immigrants. A country based on freedom of religion and they want the federal government to stay out of their efforts to impose religion on the state level. What I love the most though is the apparent belief that the Declaration of Independence is an enforcable document versus the Constitution which, by the way, makes no reference to God.

Mythmaking in the Modern Age

The Basement Tapes

When I read the first collection of Neil Gaiman's Sandman I suffered a sort of pyschosis where I couldn't stop buying more issues. I think in this day and age of required sources and citations it's a little difficult to separate the story from the creator. Still, a great story will always live on and the names of those who had a hand in crafting the story will only be an afterthought. The great stories are those that will contribute to the mythology of a society and the superheros of modern comics are those mythic images.

Supreme Court Strikes Down Constitution, Takes Aim at Magna Carta

Secular Humanism

One would think the fact that the Ten Commandments were not included in the Constitution would be a sign that the Framers didn't intend to make them the foundation of U.S. law. Still, at this point I don't think context has much to do with the matter right now. Original intent can be discussed till you're blue in the face or throwing chairs across the room. What matters right now is how allowing such displays to remain might further erode the division between the Church and the State. If a court of law can claim that the Ten Commandments are representative of the foundations for the United States then how soon will it be before other religious laws are included? More to the point, how soon will the laws of the Ten Commandments be actively enforced by the courts such as not working on the Sabbath (which is actually Saturday), honoring your parents (no matter how abusive and sick they may be), or believing in one God and only one God (of course, by God the courts would mean a Judeo-Christian one and not one of those horrible eastern gods)? If you include the Ten Commandments with a set of other documents considered foundational to the United States and are enforcable as such then you implicitly claim that the Ten Commandments are enforcable as well. Finally, if such an inclusion is made then what of the current attempts by the U.S. government to bring American democracy to other foreign countries? What of the effort to bring democracy to Muslim nations already tense over the idea of seeing their governments toppled and foreign troops rolling in? Wouldn't including the Ten Commandments as an implicitly enforcable document also mean that 'American democracy' represents a distinctly Christian, or rather anti-Muslim, democracy?

Beergarden Alliances

United States of Europe

It only makes sense that the states most frequently let down by France in the past century would be more than a little wary of relying on the mighty French army. Not that it was entire the fault of the French, mind you. Declining birth rates, the loss of a generation of men, the inability to challenge anyone economically before 1945 and the general fear of another revolution all tend to leave a country hesitant to act.