Archive for the ‘Current Affairs’ Category
that held last weeks talking points for liberal media plants, or maybe someone just had to give the “thinking man’s conservative” a talking to about too much thinking man, not enough conservative…
But, have no fear, Brooks is back:
So of course we need limited but energetic government. But liberals who think this disaster is going to set off a progressive revival need to explain how a comprehensive governmental failure is going to restore America’s faith in big government.
Hate to think what his masters and minders have in mind when it comes to “energetic government” but I think AvW is starting to figure it out…
(Oh, and while we’re in the land of the Worden: who knew that the CIA takes Mac over PC. Think different indeed…)
Anyone else notice lately that there’s been a run on human lives in the market of public opinion?
Administration officials have maintained that the U.S. needs to try to develop a nuclear warhead that would be capable of destroying deeply buried targets including bunkers tunneled into solid rock.
But opponents said that its benefits are questionable and that such a warhead would cause extensive radiation fallout above ground killing thousands of people. And they say it may make it easier for a future president to decide to use the nuclear option instead of a conventional weapon.
The Senate voted 53-43 to include $4 million for research into the feasibility of a bunker-buster nuclear warhead. Earlier this year, the House refused to provide the money, so a final decision will have to be worked out between the two chambers.
What infection, what ideological pestilence, informs the first, wrong step of response: just thousands? unless we get to tens of thousands, or better yet hundreds, we’re not yet at the level of the serious.
An upping of the ante has been going on. 9/11, Iran earthquake, tsunami, NOLA… (the first and the last, because we’re talking ‘Merican lives, count treble or even more…)
So, David Brooks has an, um, interesting column today in the Times in which he encounters / poses as Karl Marx – in order to deliver to the even-minded readership of the sunday paper a quasi-Marxist sermon. Here’s the middle parts:
The educated class reaps the benefits of the modern economy –
seizing for itself most of the income gains of the past decades – and
then ruthlessly exploits its position to ensure the continued dominance
of its class.
The educated class has torn away from the family its sentimental
veil and reduced it to a mere factory for the production of little
meritocrats. Members of the educated elites are more and more likely to
marry each other, which the experts call assortative mating, but which
is really a ceaseless effort to refortify class solidarity and magnify
social isolation. Children are turned into workaholic knowledge workers
– trained, tutored, tested and prepped to strengthen class dominance.
The educated elites are the first elites in all of history to work
longer hours per year than the exploited masses, so voracious is their
greed for second homes. They congregate in exclusive communities walled
in by the invisible fence of real estate prices, then congratulate
themselves for sending their children to public schools. They parade
their enlightened racial attitudes by supporting immigration policies
that guarantee inexpensive lawn care. They send their children off to
Penn, Wisconsin and Berkeley, bastions of privilege for the children of
the professional class, where they are given the social and other
skills to extend class hegemony.
The information society is the only society in which false
consciousness is at the top. For it is an iron rule of any university
that the higher the tuition and more exclusive the admissions, the more
loudly the denizens profess their solidarity with the oppressed. The
more they objectively serve the right, the more they articulate the
views of the left.
OK, even-minded reader (like the Dad in those obnoxious tv ads the Times puts on – know what I mean?), this is a bit confusing isn’t it? What’s Brooks – who, after all, is the official mouthpiece of enlightened neo-conservativism at the paper of record – up to? You’re especially thrown by the strange, italicized conclusion of the piece:
I don’t agree with everything in Karl’s manifesto, because I don’t
believe in incessant class struggle, but you have to admit, he makes
some good points.
Bizarre. So, the "thinking man’s conservative" has turned Marxist – or almost. (Weird line that, about the "incessant class struggle" from a guy whose bread and butter is the "red/blue" divide in the US…)
Anyway. One of Atrios’s apprentices has put on her/his decoder ring so that you don’t have to:
There really is a class war (though Brooks doesn’t believe in it)!
But it’s not between the moneyed classes and everybody else; it’s
between those latte-sipping liberals in their ivory towers and
This seems just about right. Oldest play in Brooks’s book, right. He makes his living writing pieces that seem reasonible – even seem to contradict the party line that he’s purported to represent. But between the lines, when you look very closely, it’s always the case that somehow he’s pinned it all the more tightly on the left – or at least upon the coastal elites, the bobos, the hihis, the nynys… Whatever…
That’s absolutely what’s going on here. But still – begs the question doesn’t it – there’s a serious grain of truth in what Brooks is saying here… In the end, this is how the class system works in America, isn’t it?
When are the universities here going to wake up to the system that they’re entangled in, perpetuating.
It’s funny. When you’re on your way out of an "elite" institution, bound for a position at a state university, everyone slaps you on your back, tells you what a meaningful thing you’re doing. Teachers at "elite" insitutions complain all the time about the nature of the students – the "less than diverse" population.
Isn’t there anything more we can do about it than complain? Something more than applauding gratefully when we hear of a single-digit increase in minority enrollement (better all the time!). Brooks nails the financial aid alibi in the piece:
The median family income of a Harvard student is $150,000. According to
the Educational Testing Service, only 3 percent of freshmen at the top
146 colleges come from the poorest quarter of the population. The
educated class ostentatiously offers financial aid to poor students who
attend these colleges and then rigs the admission criteria to ensure
that only a small, co-optable portion of them can get in.
Why can’t we do something about this? Why can’t the Harvard faculty start doing something about this? Like stop what we’re doing, along with all of the hallway nervous joking, and not come back until, I don’t know, everything’s changed…
Idle fantasy, I know… Here…
From a photo series a few days ago in the Times:
Specialist Jason W.
Huff, 28, joined the Guard after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11. He
never much liked school, Specialist Huff said, recalling how his
father, a marine, disparaged a college education. "Dad would always
talk about the people who were from college, and he didn’t like them,"
he said. "He said they knew more about books than about the job." His
wife, Amy, carried their daughter, Karly, in seeing him off.
Know I’m being a bit of a jerk, but it’s hard not to find it a bit funny to watch the atrios crowd discover that there’s only one thing their other hero, Brad Delong, hates more than the economic policy of Bush administration. Apparently, to offer even the mildest criticsm of global capitalist hegemony – criticism mild enough to make it on to the op-ed page of the NY Times forgodsake – is to expose yourself as "Crypto-Nazi scum." Take a look – especially at the comments – here.
Anyway, calls to mind an charming passage from Bob Woodward’s book about Greenspan. We could subtitle it, borrowing a phrase from Hobsbawm, "Clinton Learns the Rules of the Game." The game in question being the relationship between full employment and inflation.
All the economic models built
on years of history showed there was a limit to how high growth could go
without triggering inflation. To complicate matters, the economists believed –
and recent American economic history showed – that there was a level of
so-called full employment. There was a limit on how low the unemployment rate
could go without triggering inflation, and it was thought that the range was 6
to 7 percent. This lower limit was called the NAIRU – the non-accelerating
inflation rate of full employment. The unemployment rate had started the year
above 6 percent and was heading down.
Even [Robert] Rubin insisted that there was an
optimum full employment rate of growth.
The president [Clinton] was skeptical and even outraged. So the problems were too much economic growth and too many people working! It was ridiculous, he seethed.
But you know how the story ends.
From the Smoking Gun:
A more interesting story, perhaps, is that of this Lynne who wrote the letter. With a legal pad at the kitchen table, carefully delineating the parallels between "the Will banks distubed woman" and the oeuvres complets of Julia. (In Lynne’s mind, it’s simply "Julia"…) Perhaps, after jotting down three or four of these "coincidences," which the Duluth police and the liberal media had simply failed to note (or is something more sinister at work?), she placed the first disc in the player and settled into the lazy boy, pen at the ready… Taos, NM, sure as hell ain’t no Yonville… All night, as "Julia" matured, never graying, she kept the vigil, jotting down an exhaustive list of parallels. (What to do with Erin Brockovitch? Two precious hours wasted…) At dawn, she culled the 5 best, sent her fax to Duluth, and downed a bottle of…
"Cet affreux goût d’encre continuait."
Sorry for the horrific quality of recent posts. Still suffering from nicotene withdrawl…
Pretty amazing, this. Buried way down deep in another flaccid self-criticism today, the New York Times admits that it is considering turning to plagiarism detection software, the same sort in use in colleges and universities…
It also said The Times had discussed plagiarism-detection with
Lexis-Nexis, which was working with iThenticate, a firm that develops
detection software for use in academia. Once the software is refined,
the committee said, The Times should use it when plausible suspicions
If the Times would like to hire me, a few days away from the completion of a year of teaching first-year writing, to supplement the plagiarism detection software with some good old fashioned bullshit detection (Ms. Miller, we need to talk after class), I’m ready to go with my red pen.
A few items, all variations on a common theme… All picking up, perhaps, where I let off here.
1) Get yourself a copy of this quarter’s New Left Review and take a look at Giovanni Arrighi’s "Hegemony Unravelling." (The essay is here
if somehow you have subscriber’s privileges at NLR). The first part is
more or less a recapitulation of David Harvey’s descriptions of /
arguments about "spatial fixes," "switching crises," and current
affairs vis a vis the war on terror, the end of US dominance, and the
rise of China. In a sense, Arrighi (and Harvey) seem to be arguing that
the backstory of the war on terror is a reluctance on the part of the
US (a reluctance crystallized in the documents of the Project for a New American Century)
to pass forward the torch of economic and cultural centrality to
China… (the torch handed by Venice to the Dutch, from the Dutch to
the British, and from the British to the USA…) Anyway, tough article
to summarize that itself is an extremely lucid summary of recent
events. Arrighi develops a more subtle understanding of the
relationship between new imperialism and capitalism than the usual "war
for oil" line… Go take a look…
2) Was trying to explain this article to my wife at dinner tonight,
sounding a little sinostruck and gleefully paranoiac I imagine, only to
come home to these in the mail:
3) The sneak-preview after last week’s episode of 24 showed Jack
Bauer kicking some PLA-uniformed ass. I was like, huh, that’s
interesting. There’ve never been any Chinese involved in the terrorist
plots featured by the show in previous seasons.
Well, it turns out (spoiler alert!) that some sort of dissident
Chinese engineer sold nuke technology to the terrorists… And then
promptly sought shelter at the PRC consulate in Los Angeles. OK. The
Chinese govt won’t hand this guy over, and so Jack has to take matters
into his own hands. In the crossfire, the Chinese consul is shot and
killed (friendly fire – weird translation of the bombing of the Chinese
embassy in Belgrade?) and now it looks like the US and Chinese are
headed toward nuclearish confrontation.
OK – why am I telling you all of this? First of all, it’s always an
important sign in US "political" "culture" (both of course in quotes)
when the bad guys change on tv and in the movies. Seriously – I’m not
kidding. Germans, Japanese, Native Americans, Russians, narcolatinos,
swarthy Arabs, and now, suddenly, the Chinese… There’s a sort of
attunement that goes on, the US public has to get used to the idea of
its enemies. And this is how it does it. 24.
Further – the scenario in 24 is an interesting inversion of
Arrighi’s thesis about the relationship between the war on terror and
the Chinese. Where 24 casts Chinese tension as the result of an
accident, a misunderstanding, in the course of the real battle with
Arab fundamentalists, Arrighi persuasively argues that Afghanistan,
Iraq, have both been at root displacements and deferrals of a
confrontation with China. The US, the PNAC, wishes, in other words,
that Iraq was the battle that needed to be fought in order to
concretize a "new American century."
4) On China Daily today: "Workers of the World Unite and Go Shopping." Contains some gems:
An online poll by Sina.com shows nearly 66 per cent of voters prefer to stay
at home during the so-called Golden Week.
And 80 per cent say they want to celebrate May Day by shopping.
And that’s good news for the country’s retailers.
Here’s the best one, a case study of tortured discursive transition if there ever was one:
"Enjoying more leisure time is an essential index in measuring human rights."
Apologies if all of this is terribly incoherent. But I am, believe it
or not, quitting cigarettes today (very un-PRC)… Trying the patch,
which works a lot better than I would have expected. Confident that
it’s actually going to work this time. But needless to say, I’m not
myself, and the writing would be the first to go… Anyway, never
thought there’d be a shoutout to GlaxoSmithKline on Cultural
Revolution, but there it is. Switching crisis indeed…