Is Democracy Dead?

Or is Douglas Rushkoff really paranoid? I'm thinking it's a little of both, but since I love a good conspiracy theory, I dig the dots he's connectingbetween the demise of exit polling for national elections, the rise computerized voting (no paper trail), and the growth of private vote-counting companies (owned by Republicans). What's your take? I hope Rushkoff isn't serious about no longer talking about politics. He's a great storyteller. Besides, paranoia and conspiracy theories can be very useful; the trick is to know how to use them.

Posted 12:15 PM | general politics

FTR: Goering

I first saw this quotation (below) last Oct. 26th while in D.C. for the first of what appears to be an ongoing series of big anti-war protests. There were signs and slogans everywhere at the march, and one of the people I was with found a flier with this quote, but I didn't get a copy. Today I came across it again and preserve it here now for its haunting topicality:

"Why of course the people don't want war. Why should some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally the common people don't want war neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country." — Hermann Goering, (1893-1946) Commander-in-Chief of the Luftwaffe, President of the Reichstag, Prime Minister of Prussia and, as Hitler's designated successor, the second man in the Third Reich.

What think you now of that "Orange Alert" business?

Posted 07:29 AM | general politics

Peace Progress

Retrorocket has some great thoughts on the growing global movement against war. Specifically, he's angered and mystified by how easily many pundits have been able to dismiss the importance of the millions of people who oppose war. I'd agree with him, but I haven't been paying a lot of attention to that dark side. I've been tyring to remain optimistic, hoping that the dismissals are just the last gasp of a march toward war that's really struggling for legitimacy. To that end, I offer the following links about the protests and current events more generally. First, Antiwar.com has compiled a list of demonstrations around the world. It's long, diverse, impressive, and pretty impossible to ignore. A few hundred here, a few thousand there, a million or more over there… Has anything like this happened before? Second, although I'm not sure how seriously to take this, the British anti-war movement is apparently planning to shut down Britian if Blair goes to war. As Retrorocket notes, about one-sixtieth of the British population marched against war. If all those marchers refuse to go to work one day, the impact would not be negligible. The article also notes the connections between opposition to war and opposition to the kind of "globalization" that has prompted protests against the World Bank and WTO all over the world in recent years. Although the press likes to dub it an "anti-globalization" movement, it's really a social justice movement, and it's been growing steadily for several years now. I imagine the pundits who are dismissing the anti-war demonstrations are at least vaguelly aware of the close connections between the social justice and anti-war people, and those pundits are really hoping this isn't what it looks like: A huge, powerful, steadily growing global movement that is ready to challenge much of the agenda that these dismissive pundits stand for. Third, the Guardian also reports that Bush's War Timetable is Unravelling, thanks most recently to the resistance of Turkey. Fourth, the media are beginning to cover the anti-war perspective and they are getting called on it when they fail to do so. For example, Take Back the Media reports that CNN left 750 words out of its transcript from Hans Blix's last U.N. presentation. Now why would CNN want to do that? I imagine (hope) reports like this will make at least a few people a bit more critical of what they see in the mainstream media. Fifth, and mostly for fun, cartoonist Mark Fiore is doing his part to explain the case for war. And to end on yet another bit from The Onion: Bill of Rights Pared Down To A Manageable Six. Is laughing still good medicine when the humor is so dark? Written to the tune of: Where's Your Head At from the album "Rooty (Advance)" by Basement Jaxx

Posted 09:44 AM | general politics

Scary Fun II

You know, I'm tired of waiting with baited breath every day for the mail to come, only to find there's nothing but bills and credit card offers and coupons I'll never use. So I'm not going to do it anymore. Instead, I'll read the Onion, and I'll laugh. Yes, that's exactly what I'll do. What fun! Try this on for size:

Saddam Enrages Bush With Full Compliance WASHINGTON, DC—President Bush expressed frustration and anger Monday over a U.N. report stating that Iraqi president Saddam Hussein is now fully complying with weapons inspections. "Enough is enough," a determined Bush told reporters. "We are not fooled by Saddam's devious attempts to sway world opinion by doing everything the U.N. asked him to do. We will not be intimidated into backing down and, if we have any say in the matter, neither will Saddam." Bush added that any further Iraqi attempt to meet the demands of the U.N. or U.S. will be regarded as "an act of war."

Wait. Is that funny, or scary? Today the game is to oscillate wildly (a la The Smiths) between the two interpretations: laugh your head off, scream your head off, laugh your head off, scream you head off. Whooh. Now catch your breath and try this one: N. Korea Wondering What It Has To Do To Attract U.S. Military Attention Ok. If you're up for more (and if you happen to be a fan of David Foster Wallace, which, I'm guessing, does not apply to many people, but still, if...), then feast your eyes on this great parody: Girlfriend Stops Reading David Foster Wallace Breakup Letter At Page 20. Ha! The paragraph supposedly on written by Wallace is strikingly like certain passages especially of Brief Interviews with Hideous Men. And finally finally, if you haven't already reached your daily limit of laughs-a-minute vs. bowel-shaking-fears (now channeling Cake), get yourself on over to the latest two installments of Get Your War On:

Where the hell is my "Missle Defense Shield????"

ROTF, I'm telling you. Now, back to our regularly scheduled programming.

Posted 05:57 PM | Comments (1) | life generally

Deadline Extended!?!?

When I got that letter last December from Georgetown, I took it in stride. I hadn't gotten my hopes up too high, and really it turned out fine because it just gave me the incentive I needed to quit procrastinating and finish my applications to other schools. But today I was looking at financial aid requirements for the schools I'm interested in (specifically: do they seriously need my parents' financial info? I haven't received parental support for over a decade. Seems a little stupid.)... Anyway, I went to GULC's site and found this big notice in red:

The JD Application Deadline for Full-time and Part-time applications has been extended to March 1, 2003.

Recall that the letter I got in December basically said, "You're a fine candidate but we don't want to let you in until we're sure nobody better is going to apply." So now, instead of letting me in, they're extending the freakin' deadline!?!? Can you say insult to injury?

Sheesh.

Posted 02:38 PM | Comments (1) | law school

Blog Borg?

Scripting News reports that Google has purchased Pyra, the company that started Blogger and the ubiquitous "blogspot" (free web hosting for Blogger blogs). What does this mean? Big money behind blogs means....? It's hard to say, but learning a little about how Google works makes me a much less avid Google fan. In today's climate, it seems prudent to assume that any info any corporate entity collects and saves is going to eventually find its way into the TIA program. If that's true, Google suddenly stands as the biggest threat to civil liberties since, well, I don't know, Joseph McCarthy? UPDATE 2-26-03: Is Google Too Powerful? [link via So Sue Me]

Posted 10:12 AM | Comments (1) | meta-blogging