Now That’s Diversity!

David Brooks had a daring item in the Times today, in which he came awfully close (though stepping back from the brink) to saying some awfully unsayable things. But I’m not in the mood for more of this stuff tonight (if I were I’d likely be rounding on Mayor Bloomberg, too, for his flurry of idiotic and insulting remarks over the past few days.) If you’d like to read some commentary on the Brooks piece, Steve Sailer did a good job here, and it was picked up at the National Review as well, here.

No, tonight I’m thinking about aliens, but not the ones you might imagine.

Read More »

Jim Kalb On Inclusiveness

Today I read, at the new conservative/HBD website Alternative Right, an essay by Jim Kalb called The Effects Of Inclusiveness. A sample:

No person or society can realize all human possibilities. We are finite creatures who realize ourselves–become good, happy, productive, vibrant, and creative–by becoming something in particular. Since we are social, that particularity requires social particularity.

Inclusiveness denies that human need and so deprives human life of the environment it needs to thrive. A single social scheme, the inclusive society, has to apply equally to everyone. All social institutions have to be transformed so they make equal use of every possible kind of person. Society becomes a unitary machine, its members interchangeable components.

We must all be transformed. Swedes and Italians are different, and their differences make workplaces different. Inclusiveness insists on changing that and making each equally fitted to all. Every soccer mom, drag queen, black Muslim, Christian fundamentalist, and Hmong immigrant must be retailored to fit all settings equally. Those who resist can be treated as confused, ignorant, psychologically deformed, or evil.

The result isn’t diversity but a single liberal way of life variously accessorized in ways not allowed to matter. The attempt to put diversity first destroys it.

That should not be surprising. Inclusiveness is the absolutism of a rationalized commercial and administrative system. It lets bureaucracy and markets retain their hold on us, but cuts down ethnic culture to ethnic-themed fast food, religion to a poeticized version of liberal ideals, and marriage to a sentimentalized recognition of almost any sexual connection. Under such circumstances human life becomes not vibrant and diverse but boring and trivial.

In theory we are free to hold privately whatever ideals of life we want. The freedom is of doubtful substance, since private ideals of life have consequences in the lives of others. For that reason a growing range of opinions — white solidarity is one example, disapproval of homosexuality is fast becoming another — are now beyond the pale even in private.

It turned out that this article was the fifth in a series on the topic. Mr. Kalb is a solid thinker and writer, and in these essays he presents his case — which by the standards of present-day social and political orthodoxy is the purest blasphemy — with persuasive clarity. Regardless of your political viewpoint, they are well worth your time. Here they all are: I’m still reading through them myself.

El Norte

Here’s another pointed essay about the Arizona brouhaha: What If Arizona Were Quebec?

Mistaken Identity

In a speech at the University of Michigan on Saturday, President Obama castigated critics of recent government excesses, reminding them that “government is us”.

This seems innocent enough, but in fact it is chilling. The Founders saw a powerful central government as an unfortunate and dangerous necessity, the only way to administer certain tasks that cannot be performed by individuals. The apparatus of Federal government was to be a machine that existed solely in service to, and at the pleasure of, the free citizens of the United States. But here Mr. Obama tells us, explicitly and revealingly, that in his mind the State and the people are one.

“Government is us.” It is difficult to see how this proposition differs in any meaningful way from Mussolini’s words: “All within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state.”

Extra Nipples

Much has been written in recent years about the taming and effeminization of the Western male. Though there are still pockets of resistance, the dismal process proceeds apace, and appears even to be accelerating.

The community in which I have made my home for the past 28 years, the (more recently) upscale and uber-liberal neighborhood of Park Slope, Brooklyn, is perhaps the North American epicenter of this emasculating cultural earthquake. As I walked to the kwoon recently to teach my regular Thursday evening class, I passed a little maternity shop on Seventh Avenue. In its window I beheld, with a shudder of existential revulsion, a life-sized cutout of the New Man (if “man” is any longer an apt term for this bridled, caponized, and domesticated deputy female).

Here he is.

Read More »

Arizona: Phoenix, or Tombstone?

I’ve been mum about politics for a few weeks, and in particular haven’t said anything about the controversial Arizona legislation, although as you might imagine I of course see no reason why Arizona shouldn’t act if the federal government simply won’t. Meanwhile, here in New York our own mayor — who, as both New York City’s chief executive and wealthiest resident, spends his time in environment-proof bubbles here and at his waterfront estate in Bermuda, thereby having as little direct exposure to the undesirable effects of mass illegal immigration as a Patagonian goatherd — has decried the legislation as a route to “national suicide”. (That’s an interesting choice of words, by the way, given that Lawrence Auster persuasively argued exactly the opposite in his influential 1990 tract The Path To National Suicide, which I doubt Hizzoner has ever read, though I wish he would.)

Mr. Bloomberg complained that “Somehow or other, after 9/11 we went from reaching out and trying to get the best and the brightest to come here, to trying to keep them out.” Apparently in his mind there was no discrimination to be made between: a) the total cessation of all immigration; b) a rational and rigorously enforced immigration policy that admits those whose presence here might actually benefit the US in some way, and c) the complete abandonment of any effort whatsoever to secure our frontiers. Does he really imagine that it is the “best and the brightest” who are streaming furtively across the Arizona border?

But perhaps that is the point: to discriminate between those options would necessitate that we also discriminate as regards the desirability of applicants for US residence — and discrimination of any sort, even in the essential interest of cultural and national self-preservation, is anathema to the liberal mind.

But enough; if I warm to the topic any more I’ll be ranting again for months. Anyway, so much has been written by now about this that I have nothing new to add, even were I so inclined — so I’ll just offer links to some of the sharper items I’ve read over the past few days.

Here are three: by Victor Davis Hanson, Michelle Malkin, and Mark Steyn.

Hard Rain Gonna Fall

Here, with a hat tip to my friend Eugene Dushkin, is a breezy item about investment strategies for the forthcoming collapse of civilization.

S.F.

Time for more Shameless Filler.

First: reader JK sends us this sample of high culture, American Style. (Try not to be too depressed by the remark right at the very end.)

Second: an annoyingly persuasive optical illusion.

Third: why we seriously need to rethink Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.

Finally, I hear you grumble: why does it have to be Shameless Filler Night again?

Well, you thankless whelps, it’s because in order to earn a crust, your devoted host must spend the near-totality of his waking hours planted, as sessile as a barnacle, at a Formica desk in a five-foot-wide cubicle in a fluorescently lit office on the eighth floor of a tall black building in a huge city, typing inscrutable expressions from a curious symbolic language onto a glowing screen. In a bygone era he might have been a frontiersman, taming a brawny continent with naught but steel and sinew, but this is what Men have become. Which is what makes our final item so very sad.

Loopy

Hofstadter’s Law:

“It always takes longer than you expect, even when you take into account Hofstadter’s Law.”

Master Class

When I was a young man I played the drums, and was pretty sure that one day I would be a Great Big Rock Star. To advance this project, I went looking for a job at a New York City recording studio, on the theory that I’d then be right in the thick of things, allowing my incandescent career to develop along a natural course.

In 1978, I got the job. Indeed, I didn’t just get a job, I got a job at The Power Station (now Avatar), the hottest place in town. That was about it for playing the drums, though, because a) I had moved to a tiny studio apartment, with nowhere to keep drums or play them; b) I was working long and random hours at my new job, and had no time for a band; c) the best drummers in the world were trooping through the place every day, and it soon became cruelly apparent that I was not even close to being in their league; and d) I was learning the art of record-making from some of the industry’s foremost producers and engineers, realized that I had a knack for it myself, and saw that this was clearly where I should be concentrating my efforts.

Read More »

Stuff Guys Do

I’m old enough to remember the Apollo 11 mission, the one that put men on the moon for the first time ever. It was a pretty big deal. (We won’t be doing that again anytime soon, thanks to You-Know-Who.)

Now, with a hat-tip to my boy Nick, here’s the fateful launch as you’ve never seen it before.

Winner’s Circle

In every generation, some of us have children. Others, for various reasons, don’t. (Historically, most women do, and most men don’t.)

In good times, it is relatively easy to bring offspring to adulthood, and populations swell. In hard times it can be very difficult indeed, and only a few manage. When times are bad enough, lineages fail, and entire species become extinct. This fate has befallen, to within a rounding-off error, every species that has ever existed. It almost happened to us too; the entire h. sapiens population is thought to have dwindled to only a few thousand individuals as recently as 75,000 years ago.

What this means, then, is that each of us — every living creature — stands at the end of an unbroken sequence of incalculably lucky winners. This winning streak extends back through all the centuries of recorded history, through hundreds of thousands of years of unremembered human experience, through millions of years of hominid ancestry, through the earliest, shrew-like primates, through synapsid reptiles — back, back through pre-reptilian amphibians, through lobe-finned fish, back through the earliest chordates, half a billion years ago — and on and on, in a continuous chain of life spanning more than three billion years. And at any time throughout those uncountable eons, that infinitely fragile linkage leading to you, or me, or the squirrel in my back yard, or a fly buzzing in a swamp in Cameroon, could have been broken — by a predator’s snap, a falling branch, a cold spell, a hot spell, a drought, a flood, a fire, a virus, hunger, thirst, a successful rival, a dagger, a bullet, or any other of the illimitably many ways there are, in a violent and uncaring world, to die childless. It would have been the easiest thing, indeed the likeliest thing, for that absurdly, impossibly extended thread to have been severed.

But it wasn’t. And here we are.

Think of that!

Close Up Those Barren Leaves

More from Eric Hoffer:

According to Bergson “the intellect is characterized by an inability to comprehend life.” Kant was certain that “the origin of the cosmos will be explained sooner than the mechanism of a plant or caterpillar.” How outlandish then is the belief that the intellect can fathom men’s soul.

How can science unravel the chemistry of the soul when what we have here is actually an alchemy? Good and evil, beauty and ugliness, truth and error, love and hatred, the sublime and the ridiculous continually pass into each other. And alchemy is ruled not by the intellect but by magic.

Before the Sabbath, p. 79

Magic? Really? Well, let’s see how it goes; we’re only just getting warmed up. And we’ve already made surprisingly good progress with those caterpillars.

Speed And Power

Reader JK calls our attention (we’re taking a time-out in Wellfleet this weekend, and not reading the news) to an article in the Times about a new weapons system in the DOD pipeline:

Called Prompt Global Strike, the new weapon is designed to carry out tasks like picking off Osama bin Laden in a cave, if the right one could be found; taking out a North Korean missile while it is being rolled to the launch pad; or destroying an Iranian nuclear site ”” all without crossing the nuclear threshold. In theory, the weapon will hurl a conventional warhead of enormous weight at high speed and with pinpoint accuracy, generating the localized destructive power of a nuclear warhead.

I generally try to be au courant regarding matters military — but obviously I’ve been slacking off, as this is the first I’ve heard about this project. Read the article here.

What Do Women Want?

Our friend Dennis Mangan is a rising star in the conservative blogosphere, and in addition to his continuing work at Mangan’s he has begun contributing articles to the new conservative website Alternative Right. His latest is about the biological causes of the male-female “wage gap”. Read it here.

Leveling

Here’s Eric Hoffer again, writing in 1974:

The agitation about the population explosion is persuading many talented and enterprising Americans to have few children. The resulting change in the composition of the population will probably be not unlike that produced by war, which kills the strong and venturesome and increases the proportion of those least fit to improve and adorn mankind.

We see at present brilliant people agitate with all their might against the birth and advancement of brilliant Americans. They want to divert all wealth and energies toward the nurturing of the least endowed.

Before the Sabbath, p. 25

Why Science Is Cool

Here.

Europe: Doomed.

Unbelievable.

Hat tip to Lawrence Auster.

Huh?

From a Times article about the possible causes of the Polish air disaster:

[A Russian] official said that the pilot was aware “well in advance’ that he was headed to an airfield without a modern aerial navigation system. One possibility, he said, was that the pilot was not aware that the plane, a TU-154, loses altitude faster than usual when it is descending at more than 20 feet per second.

Fire and Ice

With thanks to my friend Yaniv Sarig, here are some fantastic photos of Eyjafjallajokull.

That Word Again

Of all the conceptual tar-pits into which discussions of Darwinian naturalism often sink, none smothers its victims so prolifically as the concept of “design”. We reserve it jealously for the foresightedly purposeful efforts of conscious agents, which leaves us fumfering about for a word to describe the beautiful machinery of living things, and the powerful (but itself purposeless) process that has shaped them so perfectly to the uses to which they are put. Writers of books about evolution must squirm and fidget to avoid the word, lest they give the impression of telos in discussing natural selection’s mindless action. When they do use it — which is natural enough, as the raison d’etre of, say, a bird’s wing is obviously that it allows the bird to fly — they must baffle it with scare-quotes and disclaimers.

It’s a pity. This narrow, anthropocentric definition of “design”, a categorical relic of a prior era of human understanding, leaves us with no proper term for the difference between a rock, which obviously is not “for” anything, and an eagle’s eye, which obviously is.

My view (see here, for example) has always been that we ought to broaden the definition of “design” to include not only the products of conscious agency, but also the creations of the mindless, but stupendously productive, engine of natural selection. I unapologetically see the human heart, for example, as having been designed to pump blood (so unapologetically, in fact, that I can say so without scare-quotes).

Today, however, I ran across an article at American Scientist that, after a nod in the direction of the tar-pit, argues that we should not broaden, but further restrict our ascription of design. The authors suggest that even a great many of the things we uncontroversially regard as designed — can-openers, airplanes, and so on — are not really “designed” at all, but are themselves products of the same sort of selection-by-trial-and-error that generates the design of living organisms.

The argument is interesting in that if you carry it far enough, it really holds the materialist’s feet to the fire: if the human mind is itself the product of, and operates strictly according to, the lawful processes of the material world, then we may arrive at the conclusion that there is none of what we traditionally mean by “design” to be found anywhere. In other words, while I have been willing to make a conventional distinction between the products of conscious agency and the products of natural selection, but think that the meaning of the word “design” should be applicable to both, it can fairly be argued, if materialism is true, that the distinction is ultimately meaningless.

Read the essay here.

Sluice Box

Last week my old friend Jess friend sent me, as a birthday gift, a book by Eric Hoffer. I’d known about Mr. Hoffer for years, but had never read him. I wish I had done so sooner.

Eric Hoffer, for those of you who don’t know of him, was a most unusual autodidact. Born in the Bronx sometime around 1900, he lost his mother when just a boy, and his father when still a very young man. He also mysteriously lost his sight from age seven until fifteen, perhaps due to the aftereffects of the accident (a fall down the stairs, with the five-year-old Eric in her arms) that killed his mother. Upon the death of his father, he moved to Los Angeles, and spend ten years on Skid Row before taking work as a farm laborer, and ultimately as a longshoreman in San Francisco. The harbor work suited his temperament, and he worked on the waterfront until retiring at 65. He died in 1983.

Hoffer was a profoundly gifted observer and thinker, and despite his lack of formal education, became a widely admired writer of social criticism and political philosophy. He was also, as I am finding out now, an extraordinarily acute and prolific aphorist.

Read More »

Ash Thursday

Is it just me, or does the Earth’s crust seem awfully fidgety these days? There have been earthquakes all over the place lately, it seems, and now air travel throughout Europe has been paralyzed by ashfall from Iceland’s Eyjafjallajokull volcano.

It might be getting worse. Apparently, as bad as the current eruption is, the real threat comes from Katla, another volcano nearby. According to this item in USA Today, should Katla let loose the cataclysm “would likely send the world, including the USA, into an extended deep freeze.”

(That would be bad, I guess, by most people’s lights, though with another New York City summer staring me in the face (see, for example, here, here, here, and here), it sounds to me like a pretty sweet deal.)

Meanwhile, if you’re starting up an End Of Days seismic-catastrophe pool at the office, I think the smart money is on the Cascadia Subduction Zone up in the Pacific Northwest. We’ve had a lot of action all around the eastern Pacific lately, and my sources tell me that sucker’s ready to rip.

It’s All In Your Head

In Tuesday’s post about the puzzle of consciousness (I was off duty last night, celebrating my 54th at an Argentine steakhouse on the Lower East Side), I mentioned having seen an item in the paper that day that I thought seemed timely. It was a piece in the Times about growing interest in the use of psychedelic drugs for the treatment of various psychological afflictions.

Of particular relevance were these passages, which describe the experience of a dissolving of the “self” that hallucinogens can produce:

“All of a sudden, everything familiar started evaporating,’ [a subject] recalled. “Imagine you fall off a boat out in the open ocean, and you turn around, and the boat is gone. And then the water’s gone. And then you’re gone.’ …

In interviews … subjects described their egos and bodies vanishing as they felt part of some larger state of consciousness in which their personal worries and insecurities vanished.

These experiences are very much like those achieved by various meditative disciplines, and esoteric adepts have long used hallucinogenic drugs to give beginners a glimpse of the road ahead. The correspondence, it turns out, is not just subjective:

Scientists are especially intrigued by the similarities between hallucinogenic experiences and the life-changing revelations reported throughout history by religious mystics and those who meditate. These similarities have been identified in neural imaging studies conducted by Swiss researchers and in experiments led by Roland Griffiths, a professor of behavioral biology at Johns Hopkins.

In one of Dr. Griffiths’s first studies, involving 36 people with no serious physical or emotional problems, he and colleagues found that psilocybin could induce what the experimental subjects described as a profound spiritual experience with lasting positive effects for most of them. None had had any previous experience with hallucinogens, and none were even sure what drug was being administered.

That these substances can induce mental states that are both subjectively and objectively similar to, or perhaps indistinguishable from, “genuine” religious or mystical experiences, has led to the coinage of an excellent word for them: entheogens. And that these ineffable subjective experiences can be brought about by such “material” causes as the use of drugs, or even brain trauma (watch this extraordinary video, if you haven’t seen it before) is, it seems to me, more grist for the materialist’s mill.

Read the article here.

Two Views Of A Secret

A correspondent (and occasional commenter) and I have been exchanging emails over the past few days about the mystery of consciousness — a topic that used to occupy a fair amount of space around here, but which has been bumped off the page lately by political rants and screeds.

My friend and I make fundamentally opposite assumptions. For him, consciousness and purpose are bedrock features of the world, while I suppose that consciousness emerges, somehow, from the substance and activity of our brains. (It’s worth noting that he is a theist, and I’m not.)

My interlocutor asked me:

Do you think there is such a thing as raw consciousness, awareness, an Observer; or do you think there is just an incredibly complicated causal mental chain that somehow includes self-awareness, somehow generated by the same process?

Read More »

The American Jizya

Some time ago, while the lovely Nina and I were visting our daughter at college in Ann Arbor, we went to a local comedy club. The featured act was a very funny fellow by the name of D.C. Malone, who told us, after he was intoduced, that he had just quit drinking a few weeks ago.

He paused, then picked up a glass containing ice and Irish whiskey, took a long, loving draught. After an appreciative smack of his lips, he sighed, and said: “…it isn’t going all that well.”

I know what he means; I had sort of stopped blogging about politics, too. Oh well. Maybe just tonight…

Read More »

The Right To Bare Arms

Today’s mail-bag held a potpourri of postworthy tidbits. Here they are.

First, another step for the U.K. along the path to dhimmitude. It appears that female Muslim hospital staff will be exempt from the requirement to keep forearms bare and scrubbed to reduce the transmission of pathogens. In this latest capitulation, we see once again that there is no good — not even protecting the safety of hospital patients by the practice of basic hygiene — that trumps multiculturalist appeasement, and in particular, appeasement of Islam. How sad it is to see the great British people, recent heirs to the greatest empire in the history of the world, reduced to such pitiful enfeeblement. Story here.

On a related topic, another item that is causing rather a stir is the announcement that the US now considers one of its own citizens — the fundamentalist firebrand Anwar al-Awlaki, who was born in New Mexico but now lives and foments in Yemen — fair game for assassination. That the US has authorized such measures against one of its own is, to many, the beginning of a very slippery slope. We shall see where this leads.

Back to the UK: it appears that the atheist gadflies Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens will be lurking in the bushes when Pope Benedict pays Britain a visit in September. Despite the fact that the Pope has vowed to bring pedophilia down to “acceptable levels“, Messrs D & H are arranging to have the Holy Father clapped in irons for his part in the global child-molestation coverup. Grab some popcorn.

Finally, if you’re getting the impression that I think religion has brought the world nothing more than conflict, jihad and pederasty, you’re wrong. Yes, to be sure, religion has given us all that and more — but our innate sense of the sacred, finding its clearest expression in the world’s great religions, has also inspired mankind, again and again, to lift itself above the mundane, and to create timeless works of sublime and ennobling majesty.

Like this.

Rosie

Here I am again, toiling away in the office on a Friday night, just to earn a crust.

I suppose I shouldn’t complain, though; for all I know I could soon be replaced by one of these.

Party Animal

I’m still feeling a bit blogged-out this week, and tonight, after a long day of working and teaching, I haven’t anything of substance to write about. I’ll just leave you, then, with an uplifting little news item about the discovery of a new species in the Philippines. (It is most unusual in this day and age to find new species of large animals, and according to the story this event ranks right up there with the discovery in 1992 of the Saola, a bovine creature of the Indo-Chinese forests.)

The honoree in this case is a man-sized monitor lizard, and it is unusual in at least two respects. First, unlike its relatives in Indonesia, it eats no meat; we are told that it is “entirely peaceable” and dines on fruit. Second, it is equipped with not one, but two penises — and apparently it makes up for its gustatory meekness with some mad skillz in the sack:

The two penises are often used in alternation, and sometimes contain spines or hooks that serve to anchor the male within the female during intercourse.

“In alternation”! Just imagine.

Learn more here.

The Cruelest Month

Spring is upon us with startling suddenness this year; it will be, they tell us, 88° tomorrow. All over the city the daffodils and Callery pears are in bloom, and the pretty girls have shed their scarves and boots for skirts and sandals.

For the first time I think Eliot may have been right about April. I’ll be 54 a week from today, and as I watch the living world spring joyously back to life once again, I can’t help feeling that this time it’s running ahead of me, looking back and laughing.

It won’t look back for long, of course. Why would it?

Time Out

Sojourning in Wellfleet for a few days. Back in a bit. Happy Easter, Passover, etc. to all.

Won’t Get Fooled Again

Well, it’s been kind of an eventful morning. My response to a form letter from President Obama’s political strategist David Plouffe has led to a truly mind-expanding back-and-forth exchange, and, frankly, I guess I have to say the scales have fallen from my eyes.

I’ve been a pretty harsh critic of the whole Democratic political agenda — the provision of state-supported health-care for all, the benevolent regulation of the nation’s largest industries in the interests of stability and compliance with the American people’s compassionate long-term social and fiduciary goals, the restructuring of the world’s economy to reduce inequality and combat climate change, the expansion of our nation’s workforce and social capital by the importation of tens of millions of new Americans (and with it the long-overdue transformation of a cold, white-dominated society into a vibrant rainbow of diversity), and the general levelling-off of three centuries of headstrong American individualism, with all the damage and misery that has caused both here and around the world — but after these conversations I’ve seen the light, and it suddenly became clear to me that I have spent long and wasted years in the grip of a selfish and destructive right-wing ideology.

I realize now that it’s time America started setting, finally, a good example for the world — a world that is really just an inclusive community, of kind and caring people of all races and religions; a world that has done so much for us all these years. It’s high time we gave something back, and the Democratic leadership — Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and above all, our wise and loving President — are doing everything they can to make that happen.

It’s time we got out of their way!

Problem Solved

At various times I have written (here, for example) about whether, under a naturalistic view, there can be objectively existing moral truths. I have argued that there cannot. There can be “facts of the matter” about what our moral intuitions tell us, and how they came to be what they are, but there is no external, objective standard (no “truth-maker”, as the philosophers would say) against which the “truth-value” of our moral propositions can be measured. We can say that if we want X, then we ought to do Y — and as evolved, living organisms we certainly have a great many interests that lead naturally to us wanting some things and not wanting others — but there is nothing in nature that tells us what we ought to want. Nature just is; it doesn’t care.

Sam Harris disagrees. I think he is mistaken. He made his case, briefly, at the most recent TED conference. Here’s a video of his talk.

Read More »

Service Notice

With work and other demands piling on a little bit just at the moment (it’s Sunday at 10 p.m. and I am still at the office), I must take a brief time-out from blogging.

Meanwhile, please feel free to browse our archives (try the View A Random Post button at the right).

Thanks as always for visiting. We’ll be back shortly.

Cold Turkey

Well, here I am, not writing about politics, or the accelerating decline of civilization, or any of that old stuff. It’s much harder than I thought it would be, because there are all sorts of post-worthy stories bouncing around the media and the blogosphere today, like xxx xxxxxxx‘s adventures up in xxxxxx, the “xxxxx-xxx” story out of xxxxxxxxxxxx (which of course has nothing whatsoever to do with xxxx), and of course the ongoing dispute over the xxxxxx-xxxx xxxxxxxxxxx.

But I know there are all sorts of other interesting things to think and write about, and that there are plenty of able writers out there who will man the cultural and political ramparts while I’m de-toxing. And I know that the first few days are always the hardest.

So, then! There’s so much else to discuss. Let’s get going!

ummmm…

hmmm…

How’s the weather where you are?

Refraction, And Reflection

Enough politics for now. I’m tired of it all, and I’m going to lay off it for a little while at least, as difficult as that may be (well, maybe just the occasional link now and then). When I started this blog, 5 years and 1,688 posts ago, I almost never wrote about such things, and life was perhaps more agreeable for it. And while I know my outspokenness on these matters has attracted some new readers, I also know I’ve put a few old ones off, as well.

I do think there are important things to be said — our nation and our culture, which have stood against the storm so proudly for so long, are imperiled as never before, this time from within — but other, stronger voices than mine are sounding the call loud and clear, and I’m going to give it a rest.

So for now, back to other things — and there are so many of them — for a spell. I’ll probably post a bit less frequently for a few weeks as well.

Whither Hence?

Well, as we might expect, the events of Sunday night have provoked quite a Festschrift on the right.

Here’s Mark Steyn, at National Review Online, on the decline of great nations.

Here’s Dennis Prager, also at NRO, who sees this ideological conflict as nothing less than a bloodless civil war.

Here’s George Will, on “America’s teetering tower of unkeepable promises”.

Here’s a particularly pungent item from Roissy.

And here something less up-to-the-minute, but every bit as timely: James Madison’s hope, expressed in Federalist #10, that a large Union that took the form of a democratic republic would provide a bulwark against the ancient ills of political faction. He assumed that there would always be at least some commonality of purpose between the representatives appointed to conduct the legislative affaors of the Union, but this assumption appears to have broken down; so diametrically opposed are the aims of the two factions at war in this latest struggle that even the ingenuity of Jemmy and the rest of the Framers appears to have been unequal to the challenge.

Confusion Now Hath Made His Masterpiece

“Come, thick night,
And pall thee in the dunnest smoke of hell,
That my keen knife see not the wound it makes,
Nor heaven peep through the blanket of the dark,
To cry, ‘Hold, hold!'”

The fell deed is done. In today’s Wall Street Journal, Kimberly Strassel gives us a peep beneath the blanket.

“Ay, in the catalogue ye go for men,
As hounds and greyhounds, mongrels, spaniels, curs,
Shoughs, water-rugs, and demi-wolves are clept
All by the name of dogs.”

Shades Of Night Descending

Well, it’s looking like this grotesque health-care bill is about to pass: the biggest expansion of the power of the federal government in my lifetime.

Here’s Dennis Prager on the dehumanizing, emasculating, infantilizing effect of an ever-expanding State:

Read More »

Losing Their Religion

The philosopher and “New Atheist” Daniel Dennett, working together with clinical psychologist Linda LaScola, has undertaken an interesting project: a series of interviews with pastors who have lost their belief in God. Dennett and LaScola have presented the results in a paper now available online. Here is an introductory excerpt:

Read More »

“Drink While Effervescing”

1) Alka-Seltzer: directions for use.

2) What I generally do at parties.

Counting Sheep

As often happens on Thursday evenings, I’m home late from class, with very little gas left in the tank. So for tonight, here’s an interesting website I ran across the other day: Floating Sheep. They count things, and make maps.

I Happen To Have Mr. McLuhan Right Here

Last night, unable to decide what I wanted to listen to, I stuck my hand into the CD cabinet and pulled a record out at random. It turned out to be one I hadn’t listened to in a while, and one that brought back quite a few memories — some very sad, and one that was rather amusing. Here’s the amusing one.

Read More »

Upon No Reasonable Plan

The statist machinations of the new kings of the hill in Washington inspired me a little while ago to read The Federalist Papers, which previously I had only sampled, more or less at random. They are, if you have never read them, a series of 85 essays, published pseudonymously in 1787-88 by John Jay, James Madison, and Alexander Hamilton, that explain the proposed U.S. Constitution, and advocate its ratification. The essays consider the document in great detail, and attempt to meet the many objections that had been raised against its general aims and specific formulations. To the patient and curious reader they offer a fascinating tour of the Constitution, with three of the brightest of the Founding Fathers as your guides.

In the penultimate entry, number 84, Hamilton considers at last the charge that the federal government might simply be too expensive. I have excerpted a long passage below that illustrates the scale of government this Framer had in mind. As you read it, try to keep in your own mind, if you can, that what is being described here is the same United States Government that, having just disbursed the better part of a trillion dollars for “stimulus”, is now hard at work on Obamacare. Italics are my own.

Read More »

Hope Springs Eternal

We are now waiting at the airport, finally, for a flight home that will likely not be canceled. Back to normal soon, I hope.

On the other hand, when it comes to the fate of the West, hope can be hard to come by. In case you missed them, here are an extraordinarily depressing article at Gates of Vienna, and a long thread at Mangan’s, that make the argument that the accelerating demographic changes in England and Europe — which are taking place with the full support and encouragement of the Socialist and multiculturalist political establishments of those communities — are arguably a form of ethnic cleansing directed against Northern Europe and Britain’s indigenous peoples.

All Wet

We’ve been off the air for a few days: the lovely Nina and I flew down to central Florida on Wednesday evening to spend a few days with our son, who pitches for his college baseball team and is down here for an early-season tournament. (He goes to school some distance away from our home in Brooklyn, so we rarely get to see him play.)

The weather, we are told, was lovely until we got here. As soon as we arrived, though, a vaporous and malevolent weather-system moved in, and rain poured down continuously until sometime before dawn today. All games were cancelled. (If you have ever wondered what it is like to spend three days in Lake Mary, Florida, in a monsoon, drop me a line, and I will describe the experience for you.)

Today was pleasant enough, though, and there will be baseball tonight at last, starting at 7 p.m.

Unfortunately, Nina and I were booked on a flight back to New York at 7:15 p.m., and now we are at the airport in Orlando.

It now turns out that there is a ferocious nor’easter pummeling the New York region, with torrential rain and savage gales. At the moment, though, our flight, according to the departures board, is merely “Delayed”. We shall see.

Update: We never made it out. That appears to have been one hell of a storm back home. I’ve never seen the airlines so backed up; we are stuck in FL till at least Monday evening.

Bird Brains

I’m back in town briefly, but having got home after midnight from a 13-hour day at work, I have no time for writing. But…

Remember our piece a while back about the “Monty Hall problem”? Well, reader J. Kapok has now sent along a dispiriting item about the relative mathematical capabilities of people and pigeons. Here.

We’re off again shortly. Back to normal next week.

This and That

Starting tomorrow morning, I will be traveling a fair amount for a week or so, and things may be quieter than usual around here.

For tonight: an essay from Mark Alexander on the Second Amendment case now making its way through the Supreme Court. Here.

Also, there is a new website, Alternative Right, that has been attracting a fair amount of attention in the conservative blogosphere. I haven’t had a chance yet to look it over, but here are some discussions of it, over at Mangan’s and at Reflecting Light.

Meanwhile, in a hopeful sign of a long-overdue cultural awakening, the Dutch political party PVV, led by the increasingly popular Geert Wilders, has just won some decisive political victories in Holland — though you’d never hear about it by reading the Times. More than anyone else in Europe right now, Mr. Wilders is, to borrow a favorite phrase of the Left, “speaking truth to power” — and for daring to speak his mind about the existential threat posed to Western Europe by Islam and unchecked immigration, he is under indictment on what amounts, effectively, to a Sharia-charge-by-proxy of blasphemy against the Prophet. The government’s shameful persecution of him may be beginning to backfire, though, as the PVV now seems to be attracting widespread support, and is on the march. Learn more here.

Sausage: Looking Good

The big political question at the moment is whether the Democrats will try to force their health-care bill though Congress using a procedural shortcut called “budget reconciliation”. This parliamentary loophole was put in place in 1974 for the sole purpose of making it easier to legislate the many adjustments that go into harmonizing a budget bill amongst various committees. When it began to look as if the new procedure would be routinely abused, it was braced against such misapplication by a set of rules introduced by Senator Robert Byrd in 1985.

Orrin Hatch wrote an Op-Ed in the Washington Post yesterday excoriating the democrats for considering this option to pass their health-care package. (You can read it here.) Here’s a wee sample:

This use of reconciliation to jam through this legislation, against the will of the American people, would be unprecedented in scope. And the havoc wrought would threaten our system of checks and balances, corrode the legislative process, degrade our system of government and damage the prospects of bipartisanship.

Less than a year ago, the longest-serving member of the Senate, West Virginia Democrat Robert Byrd, said, “I was one of the authors of the legislation that created the budget ‘reconciliation’ process in 1974, and I am certain that putting health-care reform . . . legislation on a freight train through Congress is an outrage that must be resisted.”

For his trouble, the liberal TV host Rachel Maddow gave Mr. Hatch an earful on her show last night. (You can see it here.) She did not mince words, and said many times, quite without equivocation, that Mr. Hatch was lying. (Not “mistaken”, or “being misleading”, mind you, but lying.) She listed, as evidence of his hypocrisy, all the bills that Mr. Hatch had helped to pass using reconciliation. There were more than a few, although Ms. Maddow seemed not to notice that they were all, arguably, exactly the sort of bills that the reconciliation procedure was intended by its creators to apply to, unlike the one presently at hand.

Apparently the feud has now spilled over into Twitter, if you are interested in following that up. (I’m not.)

So who’s right? Seems to me that both may be overstating the case a little, but my own sympathies are with the conservative opposition, as readers will already know. I realize, of course, that statecraft occasionally requires taking a principled stand in defiance of transient popular passions, but in this case the bill is so bad, the expansion of government so egregious, the tactics so underhanded, and the general sentiment of the polity so willfully disregarded, that I rather find myself hoping that the Democrats attempt this brazen ploy, fail spectacularly, and are gutted at the polls in November.

It would be nice to be able to cite some utterly impartial authority as regards the competing claims made by Mr. Hatch and Ms. Maddow, but so polarizing is this health-care business that disinterested parties are hard to come by. But if you would like to read an in-depth examination of the matter from someone who can speak with “unimpeachable” authority on matters of Congressional procedure, Newt Gingrich — the former Speaker of the House, and himself an enormously polarizing figure — today issued a detailed essay on the matter, peppered with informative links. Have a look here.

The Gift That Keeps On Giving

Small changes in the relative timing and rates of growth of an animal’s parts — a concept called heterochrony — can make an enormous difference in the adult animal’s morphology. For instance, crabs and lobsters are built of essentially the same parts, but in the development of a crab the carapace broadens quickly, while the abdomen grows slowly, while in the lobster the timing is reversed. These differences may require only tiny changes in the genome, but can have big results. A similar source of variation is neoteny, which is the retention of juvenile features in the adult. (Indeed, we modern humans are a good example of that, with our big heads, small jaws, and hairless bodies.)

It seems clearer and clearer that much of the diversity in the living world is due to little variations in important rules, and to tiny adjustments of powerful control systems. Now a group of researchers at Harvard have advanced our understanding by teasing out, from a study of — what else? — Darwin’s-finch beaks, a powerful mathematical generalization of morphological variation, with only three parameters.

Here.