The ramblings of an Eternal Student of Life     
. . . still studying and learning how to be grateful and make the best of it
 
 
Monday, May 25, 2009
Brain / Mind ... Society ...

I just started reading another book on the mysteries of the brain and mind: “How Brains Make Up Their Minds” by Walter J. Freeman (not to be confused with Walter Freeman the lobotomy doctor). I’m only about 20 pages into it, but I already came across two lines that seem too good not to share. In chapter 2, Dr. Freeman discusses the meaning of meaningfulness (that’s about the best way to sum it up!). The first quote doesn’t sound all that interesting, but when you mix it with the second quote, you get something worth pondering — sort of like nitric acid and glycerin combining to make nitroglycerin. So here we go with quote 1:

“Meaning is closed from the outside by virtue of its very uniqueness and complexity. In this sense, it resembles the immunological incompatibility of tissues . . . “

I.e., what “means something” to you won’t necessarily take root in my mind; just as my body would likely reject transplanted tissue from your body.

Given that, here’s a second quote to ponder:

“Much of the effort and energy of our lifetimes is spent in trying to understand the meanings of others and to induce others to understand our own.”

 »  continue reading …

◊   posted by Jim G @ 9:51 am       Read Comments (2) / Leave a Comment
 
 
Friday, May 22, 2009
Economics/Business ... Society ...

It’s starting to look as though our nation’s economy is bottoming out; the big drop in economic activity is abating. Things are bumping along the bottom right now. Perhaps by mid autumn there will be sure signs of renewed economic growth; unfortunately, those first signs will not include higher wages and increased employment. That trend won’t start until sometime in 2010.

We’ve just gone through the biggest economic drop relative since the 1930s. It wasn’t expected, it came on suddenly, and has done a lot of damage that will take much time and many resources to fix.

The big lesson, I think, is that real estate bubbles are nasty things; and maybe that’s because real estate ownership itself can be a nasty thing, despite all the myths about how good it is for average Americans to own real estate. America got into a serious real estate bubble sometime around 2002 (although there had been smaller bubbles in the 1980s due to Baby Boom demand), not long after the internet bubble burst. When the internet bubble burst in 2000, it didn’t do all that much damage; the big stock market run-up from 1995 came to an end, but unemployment hardly rose and Americans continued their vigorous consumer spending.

By contrast, the breaking of the real estate bubble has been vicious. Many major financial institutions collapsed or required massive taxpayer bailouts; banks stopped lending; unemployment rose; consumers stopped consuming; two thirds of the American auto industry collapsed; unemployment shot up, and the government has borrowed billions of dollars (on top of the trillions it already owes), which will weigh down the economy for at least a decade. And the whole situation reverberated internationally, amplifying the whole thing. Our government economic leaders (Bernacke, Paulson, Geitner, etc.) reacted quickly and hopefully stopped the bleeding in time. But the patient is still weak, and recovery is going to take a long time. That’s about where we are right now.

So what is the difference between real estate speculation and other kinds of speculation (such as the internet company craze of the 1990s, or the tulip craze of the 1630s)? That is a key question for economists and policy makers of the future. I believe that the key difference is that most other bubbles, especially technology bubbles, leave something behind that continues to help the economy. E.g., better technology. Even the tulip bubble left the world with something good – more tulips!

By contrast, a real estate bubble, along with all the crazy financial machinations that prop it up (currently known as “toxic assets” and “default swaps”), don’t leave you with much. There’s only so much usable land on the planet, even less in the places that economically count the most (i.e., the American suburbs). There have been some expansions of usable real estate over the past 5 or 6 years as roads and infrastructure were built to open up formerly unused lands, e.g. in the Arizona desert or the Florida swamps or the foothills of eastern Pennsylvania. But opening up new property takes time, and bubbles usually don’t give the economy enough time to significantly expand its usable land inventory. For the most part, bubble money is simply chasing what is already in place. And when it blows, much of the new stuff that was built deteriorates quickly (e.g., foreclosed properties deteriorate quickly and are subject to fires). And since the new lands that were opened were done quickly (by “fast-money” developers), they will probably have negative ecological consequences in coming years.

Personally, I’ve always had mixed feelings about real estate, even though the nation as a whole seems to have a love affair with it. I never owned any real estate, and hope not to. It can bring out the best in people (e.g., homeowners who put a lot of sweat and communal effort into maintaining a livable neighborhood), but it also brings out the worst (e.g., NIMBY activism, ethnic divisions about who is or isn’t welcome in the neighborhood, etc.). Nonetheless, real estate ownership is a key component of “the American Dream”; it has gained mythical status. To be considered a successful, responsible American, you have to own real estate; this line of thinking goes all the way back to the “Founding Fathers”. Thus, a huge industry has built up around real estate, which has been further inflated with all kinds of government subsides (e.g. tax deductions for mortgage interest, special government-sponsored institutions to facilitate mortgage credit such as Freddie and Fannie, etc.).

Now America is seeing that perhaps real estate is NOT so innocent, after all; perhaps it should not be up there with motherhood and apple pie. Lots of “dippy urban-planner types” had been complaining for many years about the environmental evils of “suburban sprawl”. They cried, mostly unheard, about the consequences of replacing natural forests and meadows with low-density exurban developments where everyone has to drive for miles just to buy bread and milk and get the kids to school, and where most of that driving is done with gas-guzzling SUV’s needed to get through the snowy winter weather. These dippy sprawl-opponents were ignored over the past 20 years by Republican politicians and well-intended families seeking their stake in “the dream”.

But now, it almost appears that Mother Nature has struck back, perhaps disguised by declining property values, collateralized debt obligations, subprime mortgages, and spiking gasoline prices. The “dippy urban planners” complaining about sprawl were right that something bad would eventually happen, but wrong in concentrating on declining water tables and vanishing bird species. Too bad that they didn’t foresee the consequences of real estate greed poisoning the human spirit; and the concomitant effects of greed and over-taxed earthly resources on the human economy. The real-estate based American dream has thus become a nightmare.

Our economy is going to recover, albeit slowly. So this was a warning, a serious warning. Let’s hope that our nation will learn to become a bit more circumspect in its love affair with real estate. Warnings like this usually mean that the next offense could be a game-changer, a game-ender for America as we know it.

◊   posted by Jim G @ 4:46 pm       Read Comments (2) / Leave a Comment
 
 
Sunday, May 3, 2009
Current Affairs ... Society ...

The Mexican swine flu, which scared the jeebers out of millions of people, doesn’t seem so scary after all. It’s starting to look like your run-of-the-mill flu. It got off to a nasty start in Mexico, but that may be because a lot of people there avoid or have trouble getting to a doctor. There’s still a lot of folk medicine going on in those little villages. So, the American supermarkets and drug stores may soon be able to restock their shelves with anti-microbial hand lotion and face masks. As a sidebar, this reminds me of the run on duct tape a few years ago, after the government released a report about how to survive if a terrorist releases radiation or deadly germs near your home. (I.e., the report said to tape big sheets of plastic around your windows and doors.)

There’s another little side-bar going on in the liberal blogosphere right now about the pig farm in Mexico where the current swine flu might have originated. (I can’t say whether this side-issue is also happening on in the twitter-osphere; the attention spans there are probably too short for it.) Some reporters and Mexican officials are tracing the new flu to a village named La Gloria, which is near an industrial food production farm run by Smithfield Foods – yes, an American corporation that produces and sells pork. Actually, Smithfield Foods is the largest pork producer in the world. Smithfield denies that their pigs were involved, saying that they are clean — none of them showed any signs of having the latest flu strain. Of course, you’ve got to wonder just how thoroughly they looked and tested; and whether the local health officials were willing to risk angering the gringo outfit that probably comprises 90% of the local job market and economy.

Personally, I don’t seek to blame Smithfield Foods alone for the flu; they’re probably running their pig farms like most any other industrial pig farm, no better and no worse. Who I do blame is us, we Americans who can’t think outside the box about our diets. I am a former meat-eater who became a vegetarian about 15 years ago, and over time I’ve seen more and more evidence of the stress that meat consumption places upon the world. Meat consumption today is big business, a product of international corporations which grow, process and serve most of the meat eaten in America and in other developed nations. The stress from it includes poorer health in old age and the resulting burden on medical resources (reflected in soaring health care and Medicare costs); and increased energy use (fuels needed for growing animals, transporting them and refrigerating them) and the global warming greenhouse gases they produce. It’s a bit harder to get fat on a balanced vegetarian diet; and grains, beans and veggies certainly use less fuel and have a smaller “carbon footprint” per calorie consumed. And now, it’s starting to look as though ham and bacon and spare ribs encourage the development of super-bugs that could take down a whole lot of people.

Why is this? Modern pig farms, like any other kind of industrial food-animal facility, try to maximize their efficiency by jamming animals as close together as possible. Also, pigs have genetic DNA structures that in certain ways are closer to human genetic structures than with most other animals (hmm, what does that say about us???). A whole bunch of pigs jammed together, tended by low-paid human workers who may not have such good sanitary habits, become a central hub for infectious diseases that could affect humans. They present a lot of opportunity for viruses to do what they do naturally — i.e., mutate, change their own genetic codes a bit. So you have all these pigs exchanging germs with humans and each other, each pig incubating millions and millions of different types of germs. This gives these germs new chances to develop even more variations, which affect their ease of transmission and what they can do to you once they reach you. Most of these virus variations are failures; they die off quickly. But every so often, by luck of the draw, a new combination occurs that can spread easily and can do some real damage to humans.

If you had a pig in the forest who developed this new super-bug, it probably wouldn’t get far. But a pig jammed together with hundreds or thousands of other pigs will almost assuredly spread it to the other pigs, who in turn will then spread it to the humans who tend them (or who live near-by in villages like La Gloria, possibly by insects). Oh, and another thing — pigs crammed together in farms also interact with birds, and we know that birds are also pretty good at developing flu viruses that can affect humans. The pig farms can’t keep birds from landing near their pigs (or roosting in their living areas) and depositing their droppings so that pigs can breath or ingest the more successful avian germs strains. Well, that’s another head-start that these pigs get in developing germs that can really knock human beings for a loop.

It’s kind of like having a house with a door that opens with a six-digit code number. Every day you punch in six numbers on the door panel, and if use the right code, it lets you in. You set the code number, which can be any number from 000000 to 999999; i.e., there are one million possible number combinations. Let’s say that there’s a bad guy in the neighborhood who wants to get into your home and rob everything and then kill you during the night. The house is pretty secure, and the only way the robber can get in is to punch in the right code number. Let’s also say that the robber only gets one chance each night to punch in one number; he doesn’t know the number, so he guesses. And he’s very persistent; he keeps coming back each night, trying another number.

If we assume that he has no idea about what number you would use, nor whether you would use some kind of pattern (like 212121) or just select a number randomly (like 598830, perhaps), then on average it will take him 500,000 nights to come up with the right code. Let’s see, that’s 1,369 years. I’m not a good math guy, but you could also come up with probability bands, e.g. something like a 90% chance that it will take him at least 100 years, etc. (Not sure of the exact number, but it would be something like that). Obviously, there’s only a one-in-a-million chance that he will finally break in and kill you on any given night. So you decide, OK, I can live with that.

But let’s say that things change, so that the robber can try out a whole lot of numbers every night; then his chances get better and better. And let’s say that he also gets some info about you, on what kind of number you might select. Based on your past decisions, he knows that you are likely to use a subtle pattern in the numbers, e.g. 791827 (the second, fourth and sixth number are in descending order). Say that the bad guy figures out what that pattern is, and is smart enough to use it to narrow down the list of possible numbers. Now this robber is a whole lot more dangerous. That’s the difference between a thousand pigs wandering around in a forest, occasionally being hunted and eaten by a human, and a thousand pigs jammed together in an industrial factory-farm in a third-world country. Viruses have a much better chance with such a pig farm of finding the right code to “break in and rob the human house”. The odds are being stacked in their favor.

So perhaps we got off light this time. The birds, pigs and people in Mexico have cooked up (thru the enhanced trial-and-error process going on at pig factories such as Smithfield Foods) another new virus, which has some “legs”. It has the right “code” to spread around in people; but it doesn’t have the punch to do more-than-average damage. In reality, humans are like a house with more than one door and door code; the robber (virus) might figure out the code to get in thru the outside door, but might not get the code to the master bedroom where you sleep. Thus you won’t be killed. BUT, with pig farms giving these “robbers” more and more chances and more head-starts regarding information structures (from the viruses they exchange with humans and birds), sooner or later a really deadly virus will emerge.

That’s the trade off for those delicious spare ribs at Chili’s or that affordable Easter ham from the local supermarket or that bacon / ham McMuffin at Mickey D’s. Don’t blame us vegetarians when the big avian-pig-human virus finally does come knocking at your door.

◊   posted by Jim G @ 11:19 am       Read Comments (2) / Leave a Comment
 
 
Thursday, April 9, 2009
Politics ... Society ...

What can be said about presidential campaign slogans? The ones that are remembered are usually from the candidates who win. Barack Obama certainly caught the mood of the times with “Yes We Can”. I forget if John McCain even had a slogan. I believe he had some theme words, like “integrity” and “honor”. Oh that’s right, he did finally put two words together: “Country First”. Nice, but very forgettable. What other campaign slogans are memorable? Well, how about “All the Way With LBJ” (Lyndon Johnson, 1964); “I Like Ike” (Dwight Eisenhower, 1952); “Keep Cool With Coolidge” (Calvin Coolidge, 1924); and “Tippecanoe and Tyler Too” (William Henry Harrison, 1840).

The most subtle and intelligent one, in my opinion, was used in John Kennedy’s campaign in 1960: “We Can Do Better”. One of the poorer ones came from Jimmy Carter in 1976, “Not Just Peanuts”. (I still admire and respect Carter as an intelligent, caring fellow, but he just never got the hang of being President). One of the creepier ones, relative to where we are right now with our current economic situation, was from Herbert Hoover’s unsuccessful 1932 re-election campaign: “We Are Turning The Corner”. In 2009, we hope that our economy is starting to turn a corner, just as they did in 1932. They had another 8 years of bad times to go. Let’s hope that we have less.

Interestingly enough, there have been previous slogans expounding the “Yes We Can” spirit. In 2004, lest we forget, one of George W. Bush’s slogans was “Yes, America Can!” And in 2005, a Middle-Eastern presidential candidate ran on the somewhat clumsy tagline “It’s Doable — And We Can Do It!” Yes, that was the one and only Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran. Note that the Iranian and Obama slogans both choose the global “We”, in contrast to Bush’s more nationalist sentiment. No wonder then that Obama wants to talk with Ahmadinejad; they’re both “we” kinds of guys. (And good luck with that!)

Anyway, here’s a good list of past campaign slogans. And for more, see the Wikipedia list.

◊   posted by Jim G @ 9:46 pm       Read Comments (2) / Leave a Comment
 
 
Saturday, April 4, 2009
Politics ... Society ...

THE REPUBLICANS AND SAINT PAUL (no, not their convention site last year): The biggest question for the pundits and political analysts right now is whether the Obama Revolution is for real. Is the USA swinging away from laissez-faire capitalism, international unilateralism and government enforcement of “traditional values”, towards Euro-cosmopolitianism, higher taxes and socialism-lite? I am not ready yet to make a call on that one. It’s still possible that Barack Obama’s election was more a combination of his own talents, the faults of his opponent, and the unique circumstances of the 2008 election (i.e. the financial and economic collapse of autumn), than a change in American political philosophy at large. But then again, maybe things are going in a new direction. There are big demographic changes underway in the voting age population, changes which favor the Democrats. Also, the recession / mini-depression that we will be dealing with over the next few years could have lasting effects on politics, a leftward impact, just as the Great Depression had in the 1930s.

The Republican conservatives, led by Rush Limbaugh, are carping day and night about Obama as the next Vladimir Lenin. But thus far the public doesn’t seem to be buying it. Joe the Plumber’s cries against creeping wealth re-distribution and central economic planning don’t seem to be getting much traction.

If so, the GOP as we know it is in for several decades of eclipse. It will become a minority party in the House and Senate, with only an occasional shot at the Presidency (e.g., if an especially skilled candidate comes along and a third party splits the Democrats; the inverse of Bill Clinton and Ross Perot in 1992).

That is, unless a St. Paul comes along within their ranks.

I recently read and re-read an article about Paul of Tarsus in The Atlantic magazine. It was by Robert Wright, entitled “One World, Under God”. Wright’s theory is that globalization of trade can bring about a kinder and gentler world, a world of inter-ethnic tolerance consistent with the idealistic notions found in some of Paul’s epistles. Wright postulates that such notions were driven by Paul’s involvement with long-distance trade in the Roman Empire, where ethnic and national differences were put aside in the name of doing business. Wright points out, more as a side-point to his theory, that Paul still considered himself a Jew and a Jewish reformer. Paul’s reforms (i.e., extending the franchise to gentiles in the name of Christ, the slain but risen messiah, without imposing Levitical laws upon them) were ultimately unrecognizable to the mainstream of Judaism. When reading St. Paul, it is hard to imagine that he presumed to speak to Judaism, although he repeatedly implied that he was (e.g., he often preached in temples during his three missionary journeys). However, Paul was successful in establishing a new world movement, even if that wasn’t what he had in mind.

So, will we see a GOP version of a St. Paul? And will something new evolve from it, as did Christianity from Judaism? If the Dems veer too far to the left, perhaps we will. Sarah Palin will not be embraced by the public as the alternative (thank goodness). Some of the younger Republicans like Michael Steele and John McCain’s daughter Meghan are discussing their openness toward more centrist ideas regarding government (e.g., support for universal health care) and the “values” questions (e.g., stem cell research, gay marriage). John McCain himself was almost a Saint Paul; had he stuck with his earlier, more centrist positions, the GOP might have started the great debate, an internal debate that will be necessary for it to stay relevant in a changing America. But unfortunately, McCain cravenly veered back to the neo-conservative platform; and as such, the Republicans went down to defeat in unity.

But perhaps within five or ten years an attractive, viable candidate will emerge who will challenge the now-stale Reagan / Bush doctrines that the GOP clings to, in favor of balancing government involvement and personal / economic freedom. And it’s not impossible that the core of the Grand Old party will ultimately reject and disown this movement, much as Judaism in the first and second centuries eventually chose to deny the growing Christian movement. We might then see a viable but forever-minority Republican Party (led by Sarah Palin), and the growth of a popular centrist party in America, as has been anticipated by some writers for years.

Actually, that’s still a long-shot scenario; the Democrats would have to really push their “power to the people” (THEIR people, anyway) big-government initiatives before the public would take a new centrist movement seriously. But there are certain money interests, such as quasi-Republican Michael Bloomberg, who might be attracted by such a scenario. You never know when the next “black swan” will come home from ancient times to roost again.

◊   posted by Jim G @ 10:50 pm       Read Comments (2) / Leave a Comment
 
 
Sunday, March 29, 2009
Politics ... Society ...

Let us now praise famous men (Sirach 44:1). I’ve lived my life mostly “under the radar” of important political happenings. So, I never got to rub elbows with any presidents or ambassadors or anyone else who might be interviewed by Barbara Walters or George Stephanopolos. I’m like most everyone else — I’ve seen a famous person from a distance (Jimmy Carter, Sen. Everett Dirkson, Jane Fonda), or I’ve talked to someone who knew famous people (the daughter of former Sec. of State Cyrus Vance, a former savings and loan bank president who knew Paul Volker), or I’ve gotten to shake hands with someone who was once in the news (former HUD Secretary Cisternos, former HEW Secretary Joseph Califano). But I don’t have Rahm Emanuel on speed-dial on my cell phone (I don’t even have a cell phone!).

However, I have had occasion to spend a few hours with certain people who occasionally show up in the news. So I’m going to give them a mini-tribute here, because all three of them seemed like good people who are doing mostly good things.

First honoree: Nicholas P. Retsinas

Mr. Restinas is currently the Director of Harvard University’s Joint Center for Housing Studies. He’s been interviewed by the press a lot lately about the mortgage crisis and the agonies of the housing market. I just heard him talking on Bloomberg radio the other day. Back in the 1990s, Retsinas served as HUD Assistant Secretary for Housing and Federal Housing Commissioner. One day he came up to Newark for a tour of New Community, and I was selected as his chauffeur for the day. He was gracious enough, even to me, and he asked the big wigs some very good questions. I think that I answered a question or two from Mr. Restinas at an odd moment when the Board Chairman was otherwise distracted. I never saw the guy again, but I got some pretty good vibes from him that day. He seemed like a seriously smart guy doing his best to make the federal government run better. Now he’s at Harvard and I’m sure that he’s still doing good things. So hats off to you, Nicholas Restinas.

Second honoree: Carol Lamberg

Ms. Lamberg was and still is the Executive Director of the Settlement Housing Fund, a non-profit affordable housing developer based in New York City. Settlement Housing has been responsible for developing over 55 developments with approximately 8,600 apartments, housing over 25,000 New York City residents in the Bronx, Brooklyn, Queens and Manhattan. The organization currently owns 42 buildings with 2,260 rental units. Besides rentals, Settlement Housing has developed cooperatives, condominiums, and two-family homes. I got to meet Ms. Lamberg in circumstances similar to my day with Nick Restinas; she was visiting New Community for a tour (but this time I was one of the guides, and not the van driver). Again, she seemed like a highly dedicated person, truly interested in bettering the lives of struggling people and families. I hope that she’s still managing to get more affordable housing built despite all the economic turmoil we’re now in. (Especially in a politically tangled situation like New York City!). So hats off to you
too, Ms. Lamberg.

P.S., according to a campaign contribution disclosure site, Ms. Lamberg was for Hilary Clinton in 2007, then got on board with a donation to the Obama campaign in 2008.

And last but not least: Harold Pachios

I got to know Hal (as we called him) in the mid / late 1980s, when I was working for an insurance industry rate-setting group and Hal was representing the industry in its rate increase litigation in Maine. He was and still is a partner in one of the most influential law firms in the State of Maine (the insurance industry wouldn’t hire any old hack!). I went along on many of the trips to the state capitol (Augusta) as I was working in the economics department and I helped to crank out the rate-of-return calculations that were presented to the State. Hal was a great story teller, as he worked in Washington back in the Lyndon Johnson years (Assistant Secretary of Transportation and Associate White House Press Secretary under Bill Moyers). He also served on the presidential campaign of Edmund Muskie. And he still has his hands in politics, serving recently as Maine State Counsel for the Obama Campaign.

Unlike the intellectual Nick Restinas and the Mother Theresa-like role of Carol Lamberg, Hal Pachos was and is more of a political wheeler-dealer. As the main partner in a big law firm, he takes a lot of money from big business. But I knew and still know that at bottom, Hal is a very good man, a fellow who got into politics to do some good. So Hal, this blog’s for you. I’ll never forget those dinners that my boss and I had with you on Commerce Street in Portland, eating really good seafood (back before I became a vegetarian), drinking Geary’s Ale, and laughing at your great stories about LBJ, Hubert Humphrey, Ed Muskie, Bill Moyers, et al.

P.S., I also once met former NJ Governor Jim McGreevey, in an Episcopal church. But I’m not going to brag about that!

◊   posted by Jim G @ 11:53 am       Read Comments (2) / Leave a Comment
 
 
Sunday, March 15, 2009
Religion ... Society ...

I’m presently reading Reza Alsan’s “No god but God”,subtitled “The Origins, Evolution, and Future of Islam”. Here is my preliminary report, from about half-way through.

First off, Aslan is a good writer. I’ve tried to read Islamic history before, but it always bores me to death. There’s a huge volume of detail about Muhammad himself. With Moses all you get is a little clip of his childhood and then the big march from Egypt; similarly with Jesus, there’s a birth story then a year or three of preaching adventures. Even the resurrection is cut short to but a few months. But with Muhammad it goes on and on; there’s this revelation and then that one, there’s this wife and later that one (or two or three), there’s this battle and then the next one. And forget about the night journey to Jerusalem, I get that all confused. Then Muhammad dies and there are lots of Caliphs and battles and a hidden Imam or two. The Sunni and the Shia split and then keep on colliding. You get to Spain for a time, and then there’s an Inquisition. The Crusaders arrive in the East, and the battles go on and on. The Turks come in and gloriously expand things, as the Byzantines finally fall and the Hagia Sophia becomes a mosque. But eventually even the Ottomans fall apart and the west muscles its way in to get at the oil. I never get much traction with the grand sweep. But Aslan does a pretty good job of keeping your attention. I must give him credit for that.

Aslan is also good at developing interesting meta-concepts regarding Islam. Ah! Finally some Islamic meta-concepts; every western writer (except the hide-bound conservatives) is afraid to present any meta-concepts on Islam. One of Aslan’s meta-concepts is that Islam is currently undergoing something akin to the Christian “Reformation”. But that reformation is still in process, it’s a fluid thing, no one is sure where it will lead. OK, that one seems important.

Another Aslanian concept is that certain of the Prophet’s teachings were over-interpreted and mis-interpreted by some of the scholars after his death through a long series of “hadith”, so that women are given less respect than Muhammad intended. Well, that tries to appease the feminists, and at least opens the door to the popular western passtime of questioning the originality of various segments of the Christian Bible (although I doubt if such a view, along with feminism, has gotten very far yet in the world of Islam). Aslan also considers the traditional willingness of Muslims to accept centralized leadership (e.g., the Grand Ayatollah for Iranians) as being rooted in Arab notions of tribal society, the social context from which Islam emerged. (Just as Catholic Christianity co-opted the political context of the Roman Empire in which it was incubated; an all-powerful Pope makes sense if you came from a place and time where the Emperor was the “Maximus Pontiff”.)

That’s all interesting. But at some point Aslan’s intended “clarifications for westerners confused about Islam” start sounding a little bit too good, a little bit contrived. Regarding the historical tensions and sometimes hatred between Islam and the Jews, Aslan attempts to establish Muhammad as having originally considering himself a Jew, or nearly so (certainly a co-son of Abraham). Per Aslan, Muhammad considered himself and his followers to constitute a Jewish reformation movement (perhaps like early Christianity).

It makes some sense, but then there’s the matter of Muhammad’s own dealing with Jewish tribes in Mecca and Medina. In some of his early battles, the local Jews joined with the foes of Muhammad, but after victory Muhammad avoided the slaughter option (so frequently exercised in ancient world) and let the Jews go into exile. But eventually it was “no more mister nice guy”; there was a group called the “Banu Qurayza” who were going to get involved with the anti-Muhammad forces at the Battle of the Trench, but in the end decided not to show up. Muhammad won that one, and after going through the motions of a trial proceeding, he decided to slaughter about 500 or so Jewish tribesmen. Aslan puts a good face on it, and says that it doesn’t reflect an anti-Jewish attitude within the Quran and Islam. But you can still find a lot of arguments out there that the slaughter wasn’t justified and does represent the start of an anti-Semitic attitude within the heart of Islam. I’ll tiptoe away from that one, simply pointing out that not everyone buys what Aslan tries to do in this book.

With regard to Christianity, Aslan takes a somewhat amusing tact. He says that Muhammad and Islam were never anti-Christian; they were just offended by the moral hypocrisy and laxity of many Christians in Muhammad’s Arabia. Aslan also takes pains to point out that Muhammad really liked and respected Jesus, and Islam still gives Jesus a big spot in its teachings. (However, it appears that they have ignored Jesus’s words regarding casting the first stone.) Aslan says that Muhammad was convinced that Jesus was a prophet, but not the theological “Son of God” or Christ. Well OK, that would fit in with Aslan’s discussion of Muhammad as semi- or quasi-Jewish. But it gets comical when Aslan explains that the Quran never condemns Christianity, but only goes after those who believe in the Doctrine of the Trinity, i.e. God as Father, Son and Holy Ghost. Those who do so cannot even be considered “People of the Book”, i.e. the “second prize” that the Quran allows to those who don’t follow Islam but still believe in God and the prophets of Biblical Judaism.

I’ve got a hot newsflash for Mr. Aslan. Every Christian faith or sect that I’ve ever heard of since Emperor Constantine helped squeeze out the Nestorians and their like has the Trinity at the core of its teachings. I feel that Aslan needs to be a little bit less politically-correct himself; Islam and Christianity have a really fundamental disagreement that exists today. That disagreement can’t be stepped around. What can be stopped is the idea that either side has the right to use force against the other, be it physical or economic or academic hubris, in the pursuit of its doctrine. And even better: perhaps both sides might consider the notion of dialectic, that “I could possibly be wrong, and we both could be wrong, even though we both still believe ourselves to be right; and someday, the better idea will emerge”.

Well, my second idea is probably a bridge too far for both Christianity and Islam. But if there could at least be a cease-fire declared, if the Christian soldiers and Islamic jihadists would all stand-down, together with the Israeli army and settlers, we might have a better world. I’d like to see Aslan say something along those lines in the rest of the book. I hope to finish his book before too long; but I’m not going to hold my breath waiting for him to say that. Aslan is still a good read, but you can see in his writing that Islam is still much too timid in applying the medicine of critical self-analysis; although Christianity still has a long way to go in that too, admittedly.

◊   posted by Jim G @ 5:33 pm       Read Comments (3) / Leave a Comment
 
 
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Politics ... Society ...

President Obama made a gloomy speech last night, saying basically that we need much more government in order to avoid an economic collapse that could cause a severe reduction in our country’s standard of living. He wants to give the government a lot of money to spend; his plan will require more and bigger government institutions in the short run, and more government tax burden on the citizens in the long run.

I’m not entirely against all of this. As a young man, I had socialist leanings. I said back then that the government IS the people; there’s nothing else that represents the “social body”. As such, government control of the economy would represent a more democratic and egalitarian way of running the economy than capitalism would. Capitalism requires that rich people control the economy; government (ideally) gives everyone a vote and a voice in it. It seems more fair.

As an old man, I’ve learned that theories like this don’t always work out. Government often takes on a life and a voice of its own, not necessarily the voice of the people. And it usually doesn’t do as good a job in running things as capitalism does.

I had a “government day” yesterday, one that gave me some food for thought regarding Mr. Obama’s philosophy (i.e., exploiting public fears regarding the economy so as to expand government). My mother is in the hospital and things are busy where I work, but my car was due for state inspection. So I got up early and drove over to the local inspection station; it is scheduled to open at 6:30 AM (sez so right on the NJ MVC web site). Well, I got there at 6:50 and there was a chain blocking the driveway, with two or three cars waiting behind it. So I got in line and waited. At about 7:10 a guy finally walked out and took down the chain. OK, fine. Despite the delay, my car passed and I went home.

Next, I needed to visit the Post Office as to buy a money order. Why, in this day and age of credit cards and checks, would I need an old-fashioned money order? Because a local government agency made a mistake and claims that I have an outstanding parking ticket, in a town that my car and I had never even seen. I received a cheery note in the mail from this government agency, stating that if I didn’t send them $95 by the end of the month, they would start collection actions that could include detainers and a revocation of my driver’s license. And by the way, this agency didn’t accept checks or credit cards; only money orders were acceptable. Well, I intend to protest all of this; but having once had my drivers license nearly revoked because of a government agency’s mistake, I decided to pay first and argue later. So I needed a money order, and a bit of research told me that the Post Office was probably the best place to get one.

USPS.COM told me that the local P.O. would open at 8:30 AM. So I got there at 8:45, and guess what? It wasn’t open yet. There were some people waiting at the door; they had heard that it would open around nine. So, another government-sponsored wait for me. Around 10 minutes after nine, the Post Office window finally opened. After a few more minutes I was able to get my money order, as to forestall the government from taking my rights to drive away (and thus be able to help my mother while in the hospital).

While at the window counter, I thought that I might combine some pleasure with business and buy a small sheet of commemorative stamps; hey, why not support a government effort to make its product (postage stamps) nicer to the consumer, and even worth collecting? Well, the friendly postal clerk looked in his cabinet and told me, sorry, no commemorative stamps. What? I get a quarterly catalog from the Postal Service telling me about their commemoratives, and I knew that a variety of special stamps had just been printed celebrating Abraham Lincoln’s 200th birthday, the Chinese New Year, Edgar Allan Poe, and some other stuff. Sorry; my local Post Office was not participating in consumer marketing that day. Just the basics — take it or leave it (after requiring a half hour wait).

Ah, government. Under Obama, government is going to play a bigger role in all of our lives. So we, the common folk, are going to experience more paperwork, more waiting in lines (or on hold on telephones), more “take it or leave it” transactions, more “obey or we go after you” orders. And yeah, more taxes eventually.

Government (as we know it here in the USA) gives its best efforts to 1.) those who get the most attention from the press; 2.) those who can sway the most voters; or 3.) those who work the system best (e.g., utilizing constitutional guarantees to sue the government). Sometimes poor and middle class people can do this; most often, it’s the rich and powerful who do it best. With capitalism, the rich and powerful make the big decisions; but at some point they have to think about whether the poor and middle class will buy what they offer. So, when the dust settles, both systems favor the rich and powerful, but give something to the poor and middle class. Neither is clearly a better system, from the social justice perspective. (If you remember the lessons of history, you will forget about communism as an alternative; communist centralism makes the biggest promises to the poor, and then cheats them the most.)

But yes, there are good things about government, and they were also part of my day. I was able to drive reasonably quickly to my mother’s hospital on a highway built with government funding. My mother’s health is largely subsidized by the government (Medicare). And I myself work for local government, and I was able to get some things done that day that made our agency’s operations a tiny bit better (but admittedly, I can sometimes be a brain-dead, rubber-stamp bureaucrat too; it’s contagious).

So I’m not saying that President Obama is entirely wrong. But for such a bright guy, for a politician who campaigned as an “intelligent pragmatist”, I am surprised at how quickly he has leapt into the “big government” pot. The American people may let him get away with it this time, given the mess that we’re in; but at some point, they may revolt and start listening to the Republicans once again. And then, things will go too far the other way; too much will be handed back over to the private sector. It’s all a question of balance, and I wish that Mr. Obama would try a little harder to strike a good, steady balance (and avoid the inevitable counter-revolution). Even if that means giving less power and glory to Nancy Pelosi and Obama’s many other Democrat friends.

P.S. — Joe Connolly from the WSJ made a good point today on his Business News broadcast (on CBS newsradio), regarding middle aged people getting laid off. He noted that employers are getting flooded by resumes these days, and are tempted to immediately throw out the ones from older folk. Then he suggested that they think twice about that, given that the entire crew of US Airways flight 1549 (the one that successfully ditched in the Hudson River last month) was over 50.

◊   posted by Jim G @ 9:12 pm       Read Comments (3) / Leave a Comment
 
 
Saturday, February 7, 2009
Science ... Society ...

The “rate of incidence” of autism (i.e., number of new cases each year per 1000 people) has increased quite a bit over the past 25 years in the USA. Back in the late 70’s, only around 1 or 2 children per 1,000 developed autism. But today, this rate is estimated at around 6 per 1,000; roughly triple what it had been. What the heck could have caused this? The usual suspect is pollution and toxic chemicals within the environment. Well OK, but the environment here in the USA was already quite polluted back in 1980, and had been for some time. There could possibly be something more happening.

A recent study suggests that the autism rate has increased because kids (and maybe also their mothers) don’t get enough sunshine these days. An economics professor from Cornell named Michael Waldman did a study which found a mathematical correlation between the amount of rainy or cloudy days in a county and the county’s autism rate; and also with how long the county has had cable TV available. The study indicated that the highest rates generally occurred in counties with a lot of clouds and rain, and where cable TV became available early on. The lowest rates were usually in sunny counties where cable didn’t come until later, or is not as prevalent in households.

Of course, a statistical correlation does not always mean that there is a meaningful cause behind it. But this one sounds interesting. It makes rough sense that a vitamin D deficiency could mess up the body metabolism, including the nerve system. But isn’t vitamin D put into milk so that kids always get enough? That’s true; but nutritionists admit that man-made vitamin D isn’t quite the same as the natural stuff produced by the skin from sun exposure; the natural stuff may well be better for you. Perhaps getting less real vitamin D while kids sit inside playing video games or watching cable TV movies is having a negative effect. Ditto for their parents, who probably keep their children out of the sun more than my parents did, for fear of skin cancer. Another factor: the more you stay indoors, the more exposed you are to indoor pollutants like formaldehyde and fire retardants.

Here is a link for a bar chart comparing the autism rates for children from all 50 states. Generally, the southern states have lower rates and the northern states have higher rates. You might expect people and kids in the northern states to get less sun, due to cold and sun angle. But there are exceptions; Alaska, N. Dakota, Montana, and Iowa have low rates. North Carolina, Missouri, Georgia, and Virginia have high rates. But then again, the first four are very rural, whereas the last four have big urban and suburban areas. Those areas have more pollution and more families with cable and computers with video games (or have had them longer). Hmmm.

Well, this theory may or may not hold up; but it seems clear that further research is needed, honing in on causative mechanisms. And also on preventative mechanisms — like good old-fashioned sunshine. The whole thing seems more credible than the thimerosal theory of autism, i.e. regarding the use of thimerosal (a mercury-based chemical preservative) in childhood vaccines.

Here’s one more interesting tid-bit. Another recent study indicates a direct interaction between vitamin D and genetic variations that increase the risk of multiple sclerosis. The study suggests that vitamin D deficiency during pregnancy and early youth may increase the risk of developing MS later in life. MS has also been recognized as having a north-south effect (i.e., greater incidence in the higher latitude northern areas). MS incidence rates may be increasing, especially in lower, sunnier latitudes, although not as dramatically as autism. Also, autism is biased towards men, while MS is more prevalent in women.

Perhaps we need sunshine more than we think. Sure, too much sun increases the chance of skin cancer. But perhaps many of us have over-reacted with SPF 100 sun-blocks and growing preference for the indoor life. Perhaps we — and especially our kids — need to get out in the daylight more often!

◊   posted by Jim G @ 1:17 pm       Read Comments (2) / Leave a Comment
 
 
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
Current Affairs ... Society ...

I’m not much of a pop culture guy, even less of a pop culture critic. It’s hard to properly criticize that which you don’t know much about. But I have seen enough TV commercials in my time, so I’m going to take a crack at saying a few things about the commercials on the Super Bowl last Sunday. I re-viewed them since the game via hulu.com, just to make sure I know something of which I will now attempt to speak.

Overall, I found the Super Bowl commercials to be quite unpleasant and depressing. OK, part of that is age. The ad companies are aiming at a younger audience during the Bowl, not at people over fifty. But still, I was once under 50, and back in those days, I found commercials to be much easier to take. Why? It’s hard to put a finger on it, but if you’re gonna try to be a pop culture critic, you’ve got to try. So here goes.

Back in my youth, the commercials didn’t seem to be trying so hard to get one’s attention. They seemed to be more subtle, more mood-setting, more pleasant. The best ones tried to make you feel good, as to get you in a good mood about the product being pushed. They used music and cinema to set a positive tone. Some of the best commercials were all mood, e.g. Michalob beer commercials featuring tunes by Eric Clapton and showing dusky scenes. Or they used subtle humor and wit, e.g. the old Alka-Seltzer ads (“can’t believe I ate the whole thing”, or the professional pie-eaters at work). Or they came up with a catchy jingle, some of which I still remember 40 years later (“Schaefer is the one beer to have when you’re having more than one”, or “There’s just one Schlitz, nothing else comes near; when you’re out of Schlitz, you’re out of beer”).

Sure, there were plenty of cheap-o commercials shouting out for cheap furniture or food blenders that double as wood routers and tile cleaners. But when a sponsor spent big money, they usually got a smooth, soothing, subtly entertaining product. And if it wasn’t subtle, it wasn’t dumb and puerile either.

I guess that the public has lost much of its attention span since then. Today, the most expensive commercials need to be a bit outrageous, even slapstick and gross (by my standards). There’s plenty of violence and eschatological humor. Sex of course is pushed to the limit for family TV. Music and rhyme are not important. Taste is pretty much gone. If there is any mood, it’s dark and cynical, self-aware and self-depreciative. Life as one big video game. That’s what I mostly took away from the Bowl ads. The big money and big audiences involved with Bowl air-time seem to propel a “race to the bottom”.

But let’s go over some of these ads, to see if this is truly the case.

  • Go Daddy, the “five showers a day” sexy woman being watched on a web site by some young guys: I find it interesting how web porno has now become “cute”.
  • Doritos, the crystal ball: A celebration of mayhem, with an old guy getting hit in the crotch. Yea, my fifth grade class would have loved this.
  • Pepsi, McGruber / Pepsuber: A semi-witty parody of high-tech adventure shows, with a bit of self-reflective cynicism regarding the big-sell; i.e., an anti-commercial commercial. But in the end, it’s just another big fireball explosion, just more “harmless annihilation”. Good old fashioned cynicism triumphs.
  • Audi, the car theft chase: More video-game mayhem, but made cute by the fact that nobody really gets hurt or dies, e.g. when the guy on the motorcycle wipes out.
  • Pepsi, “I’m Good”: Even more “cute violence”, more human injury just for fun.
  • Bud Lite, “Drinkability on the slopes”: Mayhem, continued. A skier hits a tree and some picnic tables at high speed, but once again it’s all made cute; no massive head injuries, just a body cast that “the chicks all love”.
  • Doritos, “Crunch Power”: Mayhem once again. Once again, we watch as a human body takes massive trauma (being hit by a fast moving bus), But everything’s fine here in ad-world, the guy is just a bit dazed and sprawled out on the windshield. Wow, how amusing and entertaining . . .
  • Career Builder, “Signs That You Need a New Job”: Sort of witty at first, but the guy in the bikini shorts puts this one back into the 12-year-old humor zone. The repeated physical abuse of a Koala Bear gets the required gratuitous violence in.
  • Denny’s, “Thugs”: an ominous “Godfather/Sopranos” scene over breakfast, but the plan to kill are interrupted by an enthusiastic waitress applying canned whip cream to the pancakes. Cute in a way, but sad that even Denny’s has to resort to mortal threat in order to sell old-fashioned comfort food.
  • Coke, “Palmero and the Kid”: Nice at first, a kid giving an NFL star a soda. But no, they couldn’t just leave it at that; Palmero has to get violent with the corporate guys who object. (Oh, yea, it’s just an NFL tackle, even though in real life such a move would slam your head into the concrete so fast that you’d never wake up.)
  • Bud Lite, “Meeting”: A guy sitting in an office meeting gets hurled out of a third-story window. Then gets up and brushes himself off; no severed spine, no shattered hips. Sorry, that’s just not the way that gravity works on this planet.
  • Monster, “desk under the animal’s butt”: OK, here comes the classic fourth-grade eschatological humor.
  • NBC, LMAO Clinic: Oh yea, NBC is so outrageously funny that you need a doctor to reattach your butt. Eschatology 101, continued.
  • Teleflora, “Boxed Flowers at the Office”: How nice, the crummy boxed flowers from a competitor are in a bad mood and insult and degrade the woman they were sent to, right in front of her co-workers. Not very uplifting; after that ad, I wouldn’t want any flowers at all, no matter how fresh and quickly delivered.
  • Bud, “Conan in Sweden”: Yuck, anything with Conan is a non-starter. A machoed-out Conan doing weird stunts is even worse.
  • H&R; Block, “The Grim Reaper”: death and taxes versus the little guy. OK, no one dies or faces severe injury in this one. Maybe there’s even a bit of wit (a rare commodity during the Super Bowl) when the reaper leaves with a fatal threat, then comes back and asks for parking validation.
  • Castor Oil, “The Grease Monkeys”: Strange days, indeed; to sell something bland like motor oil these days, you gotta get weird (monkeys invade a suburban home garage).
  • Pedigree pet adoption service, “Weird Pets”: It’s sad to see a good cause, like finding homes for unwanted dogs, needs to send out ostriches to threaten senior citizens, and have a rhino take down a living room wall just to get some attention.
  • Kelloggs Frosted Flakes, “Growing Fields”: The background reality is stranger here than the growing crops linking arms together in the video. Kellogg’s wonderful sugar bombs are helping to feed the child obesity crisis, so the PR folk back at corporate HQ started a donation program to build or improve playing fields in middle-America, as to help real-life kids sweat off the mega-calories that Tony the Tiger shills to them.
  • Cash4Gold: OK, here’s one for the older crowd. It’s just a retro 1 AM commercial camped up a bit with Ed McMahon and MC Hammer.
  • Hulu, “Alien Brain Mush”: This one is another self-parody, an injection of irony on top of retro sci-fi. It’s almost interesting, but it doesn’t hold after Alec Baldwin turns into an alien; the implication always has to be brought home with a sledgehammer at the Bowl.
  • Bridgestone, “Taters” (Mr. and Mrs. Potato Head take a spin): Well, now we start with the more harmless stuff.
  • Taco Bell, ”
    Guy Meets Cute Girl”: Again, harmless and bland.
  • E-trade, “Talking Babies”: Again, harmless and bland.
  • Gatorade, “Mission G”: Again, harmless and . . . oh, wait, that really is Tiger Woods, isn’t it.
  • Hynduai, “Angry Competitors Now Get Our Name Right”: Once the shouting is over, harmless and . . .
  • Bud, “The Clydesdale Adventures”: One more time . . .
  • GE, “Wind Energy”: A boy captures the wind in a bottle to help grandpa blow out his birthday candles. And GE will use that wind to save the world. It’s bland all right, but I’m not ready to say that any message from GE is harmless.
  • Monster / NFL “Fandom Contest”: How depressing, a reminder that 99.999 percent of us are just specs in a huge crowd. How wonderful that the great NFL God promises to raise one of us up to experience “mega-TV-pro sports-world”, the true definition and meaning of life . . . oh Socrates, where are you now?
  • Hyndaui, “Assurance”: wait, here’s an old fashioned commercial, with soothing guitar music and artistic mood shots. How did that one get in?
  • Toyota “Venza”: more modern art and good taste. Well, maybe the car makers get a pass on needing to be brash and gross in hawking their product. I guess they don’t want to seem TOO eager to sell their stuff; they don’t want car prices to crash in this recession.
  • Pepsi, “Generations Refresh”: Wow, Bob Dylan singing the praises of the military! Talk about big-cola revisionism. I guess it all makes sense if you do stay “forever young”, as the theme song goes. Sorry, I’d rather be getting old but still able to remember what the 1960’s were really like.
  • GE, “The Smart Grid Scarecrow”: A twist on the classic Ozzian formula, you know, Dorothy and Toto and The Wizard and all that. So, I was wrong; some old-school commercials still slip in. But this is NOT an example of the better stuff from the old days.
  • Bridgestone, “Mars Explorers”: Actually, this one was a bit like the better stuff from the old days. Someone steals the tires on the Martian planetary rover. Houston, we have a problem.
  • Priceline, William Shatner in a Wiretap Van Outside Your House: Not exactly the good old days, but not the new junk either. Sort of a witty takeoff on high-tech espionage shows.
  • Cheetos, “Chester the Tiger”: Well, a little bit gross with those messy pigeons attacking the chatty girl at the next table, but Chester pulls it off in the end.
  • Sprint, “Roadies On Takeoff”: Finally, a commercial that I really liked! Yea, flying today would be a lot more fun if roadies ran the show. Instead of calling off “V1, V2” as the plane prepares to “rotate” skyward, the roadie pilots yell “let’s rock!”. And then the runway fireworks go off. Cool!
  • Springsteen and E-Street, “Mini Concert”: Oh, that wasn’t a commercial? That was supposed to be real? Whatever. Bruce was trying a little too hard, but it was nice to see Stevie Van Zant and Clarence Clemmons being them selves. After all the years, some guys hold up.

So, there were one or two good commercials amidst the dross. And the game was pretty good too. But I always feel better somehow after football season is over. Spring and a season of new hope will get here yet.

◊   posted by Jim G @ 10:23 pm       Read Comments (3) / Leave a Comment
 
 
TOP PAGE - LATEST BLOG POSTS
« PREVIOUS PAGE -- NEXT PAGE (OLDER POSTS) »
FOR MORE OF MY THOUGHTS, CHECK OUT THE SIDEBAR / ARCHIVES
To blog is human, to read someone's blog, divine
NEED TO WRITE ME? eternalstudent404 (thing above the 2) gmail (thing under the >) com

www.jimgworld.com - THE SIDEBAR - ABOUT ME - PHOTOS
 
OTHER THOUGHTFUL BLOGS:
 
Church of the Churchless
Clear Mountain Zendo, Montclair
Fr. James S. Behrens, Monastery Photoblog
Of Particular Significance, Dr. Strassler's Physics Blog
Weather Willy, NY Metro Area Weather Analysis
Spunkykitty's new Bunny Hopscotch; an indefatigable Aspie artist and now scholar!

Powered by WordPress