ambivalent imbroglio home

« July 20, 2004 | Main | July 22, 2004 »

July 21, 2004

Both Sides?

Goshohmy! That's what one of our clients this summer says when he's surprised by something: Goshohmy! It's really quite a good exclamation, and expresses my surprise that this little post from Monica has generated so many responses, include this latest from Nicole. It started with an offhand comment about Slate, I mentioned Salon, and away we went. So here's a long response to Nicole's excellent long response (you'll have to read what she wrote for this to make sense):

UPDATE: I had the link to Nicole's post wrong. I think it's fixed now.

Like I said, I really don't read Slate. If you say it covers both sides, I'll take your word for it.

But where is "the center" in our country? Is it anywhere near where you'd like to be? If so, you're certainly doing the right thing supporting it. I think (and lots of data supports this) the so-called "center" in our country has shifted dramatically and horribly to the right in the last 30-40 years, so yeah, I'm extremely opposed to that. I think many "politicians who work close to the center" are not so much working as coasting along on the tides of the status quo. Sure they get shit done, but perhaps that's because they only try to do the easy stuff, the stuff nobody cares too much about because, hey, it's close to the center already, no extreme opinions involved, no worries.

And sure conservative issue positions are valid; it would be nice to see some politicians stand up and be conservatives. How about conserving our tax dollars? How about conserving the environment? How about conserving the health of Americans by providing health care for everyone? (By the way, you think 97% of Americans don't want that? Think again. Of course, it all depends on how you phrase your polling question.) What passes for conservatism today is a farce and is in fact among the most profligate agendas ever to hold sway in America. The only thing they want to conserve is their own fat bank accounts, and everyone else can pay the price.

We're living in extremely screwed up times. I'm extremely angry and dismayed about that, and I'm extremely determined to do something about it. I agree that lefties shouldn't insulate themselves from more than half America, but when 99% of the news sources available to me on a daily basis (radio news, newspapers, tv, web) are claiming to give me both sides, I'm not to worried about getting out of touch by reading one or two websites that don't make any such pretense.

Which reminds me: Lots of news outlets claim to give us "both sides" of issues, as if that's all there was. What about side 3, 4, 5 and so on? Very few stories have only two sides; you suggest Salon is extreme, I suggest it's just a 3rd side, and sometimes a 4th or more. What's so bad about that?

And since you asked what purposes so-called "extremism" serves, let me ask you: Whose interests does your dismissal of so-called extremism serve? The interests of the status quo, it seems to me. And like I said, if that's cool with you, then by all means, carry on— digest a steady diet of Slate and other mainstream news sources, support "centrist" politicians, etc. But if you'd like anything about our society and our world to change very much at all, you might want to think again about how you define "extreme" and where you draw the line about what you'll listen to, read, watch, etc.

Either you repeat the same conventional doctrines everybody is saying, or else you say something true, and it will sound like it's from Neptune. Noam Chomsky

But, and so, ok. We're on the same side, really, I think, and I do understand your point that if the only things you say sound so whacky people think you're a freak or a lunatic then you'll never get anything done. That's true. But what if we think of it this way: There's a limited range of acceptable debate in our society. Right now, that range is about an inch wide, and everything outside of that little inch-wide band of acceptability sounds like it's from Neptune. In order for us to have a healthy, happy, productive and prosperous society, that range of debate needs to be much wider. For now, let's aim for doubling it to two inches. How do we do that? I'm not sure, but I bet if more of us are constantly making noises that sound like they're from Neptune, that range of acceptable debate will start to expand. So do you want to spend your life working w/in an inch of acceptability, or would you like to hope for more?

Posted 09:17 PM | general politics


That Journals Thing

DG has rounded up a number of blawgers who deserve congratulations for recently winning spots on their respective law reviews, herself included. So:

Congratulations, everyone!

I'm sure there are many more blawgers out there who have made it on their journals this season, or who will be notified soon that they have. Congratulations to them, as well.

The journal is a big deal for many law students, and while I previously mocked our journal competition, I did enjoy the exercise. That's partly why I was thrilled to learn last Sunday that I did manage to earn a spot on the American Intellectual Property Law Association's quarterly journal. It's not our law review, but it ain't nothin', either. I'm told that this is a great compromise as far as the four journals at GW go because, although a position on the AIPLA journal may not carry the prestige of one on the law review or one of the other journals, it also (reportedly) doesn't require as much time or stress. According to an email from the journal, my workload will consist of three major tasks:

  1. Preemption Check. For each article that we consider for publication, we ensure that the subject matter has not been "preempted," i.e. already published. Each article must address a novel issue or take a new twist on something already out there.
  2. Compile collection. For each article, our staff is responsible for verifying that the material cited by the author actually exists. We retrieve a hard copy of each source cited and highlight the area referenced by the author. This is to avoid plagiarism and to ensure that we only publish articles grounded in fact.
  3. Blue Booking. The article must be BB perfect. In those instances were several blue-booking methods are acceptable, we must ensure that we chose those methods that conform to previous AIPLA issues to ensure consistency.
I assume and hope that we'll also be writing a note at some point. I think the AIPLA journal would be a good place to argue that Lexis and Westlaw are abusive and antisocial uses of intellectual property protections, don't you?

Posted 08:37 AM | Comments (7) | 2L law school


Laramie Learns Ignorance

Web serendipity: Via a link on Scripting News to a cool photo of Arizona lightning, I just stumbled upon Learn Ignorance, a photoblog featuring daily shots of Laramie, Wyoming and environs. Nice!

Yeah, I'm probably biased about how nice this is. I did a lot of my growing up in Laramie, and got my undergrad degree there, plus it's just fairly rare to stumble upon anything from Wyoming—online or off. Last I checked, it was the least populated state in the nation (more cattle than people, I believe), spent more per capita on education than any other state, and its sole university is the highest (elevation-wise) in the nation at around 7,230 feet. Wyoming is a special place in many ways, one that very few people seem to know much about (it's somewhere near the heart of flyover country), so it's great to see such a neat site coming from there. I'm not sure about the name; are we supposed to learn about what we're ignorant of, or is it really encouraging us to be more ignorant?

For more than you ever wanted to know about Wyoming, check out its FedStats Page. Fun facts about Wyoming as compared to D.C. and U.S. averages:

  • Percent of population claiming to be "white": 92.1% WY; 30.8% D.C.; 75.1% U.S.
  • Median home value: $96,600 WY; $157,200 D.C.; $119,600 U.S.
  • Average commute time (minutes): 17.8 WY, 29.7 D.C., 25.5 U.S.
  • Median income: $37,892 WY; $40,127 D.C.; $41,194 U.S. Think about that. A good number of people in this country make $60-80k/year, others make over $100k, and still others make millions each year. If $40k is the average, then that means a lot of people are making much less than that.
  • Percent of persons below the poverty line: 11.4% WY, 20.2% D.C., 12.4% U.S.
  • Persons per square mile: 5.1 WY, 9,316.4 D.C., 79.6 U.S.

Posted 06:28 AM | Comments (7) | life generally


about   ∞     ∞   archives   ∞   links   ∞   rss
This template highly modified from The Style Monkey.