Yes, ladies and gentlemen… 27 minutes from Mr. William Bartley and the year 1599.
Yes, ladies and gentlemen… 27 minutes from Mr. William Bartley and the year 1599.
My good friend Mike Fletcher has some interesting observations regarding Facebook, not to mention its absolute and utter worthlessness:
Maybe it has changed the world. It’s made us all a lot more angry. We’re more polarized than we’ve ever been.
But when you post for your own pet cause, or religion, or weight loss miracle, you’re not changing minds. Neither am I.
More than likely, we’re just pissing people off. I’m not brilliant, no wait I am, but that’s not the point.
It wasn’t brilliance that made me see this. It was experience. I spent several years as a political blogger convinced that if I could just get people to see the truth, then they would believe as I do. It didn’t happen. And it’s not going to.
That’s why I don’t play that game any more. Never mind the fact that my working in the arts doesn’t necessarily mesh with my political background (oh, don’t pretend you don’t know my resume).
Truth be told, I’ve been tempted to give in to the same temptation and discussed this very topic with my consigliere. Why bother adding to the cacophony of noise when, frankly, the entire conversation has devolved to Cass Sunstein’s prediction in Republic.com. Continue reading
Of course, you deserve to be reading some items from the New York Times, right?
This gem comes from a review of Max Beerbohm, a man I have rarely encountered, but just might have to pick up his selected essays after all:
Each of these humans seems to have been guided by the principle articulated by Kingsley Amis: “If you can’t annoy somebody with what you write, I think there’s little point in writing.”
Nowadays we have many writers who can rise to the occasion when called upon and, like volunteer firefighters in reverse, burn a stupid thing to the ground. But we have far fewer essayists of the sort you can point in almost any direction and be certain they’d return merrily gnawing on the bones of the topic as if it were a tub of fried chicken.
The world could use more of these — not the vulgar sort — but just folks that can apply wit without sarcasm.
Then again, appreciation for the essayist is in vogue. Montaigne the Proto-Blogger seems to be a lodestar of sorts for just the right kind of example, even if folks rarely if ever dedicate the time to sit and read at leisure anymore (which is a shame).
UPDATE: Just in case you were looking for more writing advice and that sort of thing, Umberto Eco would like to pull you aside for a moment:
[Avoid] the exclamation point to emphasize a statement. This is not appropriate in a critical essay… It is allowed once or twice, if the purpose is to make the reader jump in his seat and call his attention to a vehement statement like, “Pay attention, never make this mistake!” But it is a good rule to speak softly. The effect will be stronger if you simply say important things.
Worth a read.
The lyrics are a bit trippy…
-Yes, a lady with pearly hair has come
Was I dreaming? Or maybe it was real.
Laaa laaa la la la laaa laaa la la la la laaa
…but no matter.
Andrei Rublev — which if you haven’t seen the film, you ought to.
One of the most things your humble writer faces from time to time is that there’s so much quality stuff out there: arts, culture, politics, and books. Folks love to complain about the downfall of social media descending into cat pictures and Upworthy-style clickbait — and there’s some truth to that — but it sidesteps all of the really excellent stuff out there. Truth be told, if you can push past the saccharine, there’s a lot of tremendous content that hearkens back to the blogosphere of 10 years ago, where arts, culture, politics, etc. truly reigned supreme.
Of course, my tastes vary from the eclectic to the sublime. Politics just happens to be one of a many-sided intellectual palette, and though not all these things will interest everyone, I suspect that some of it might interest a few of you… and to that end, I’ll share.
Meet the 26-year-old who’s taking on Thomas Piketty’s ominous warnings about inequality (Washington Post): Loyal readers will recall our previous conversation about Pinketty’s Capital and the discussion over r > g (rate of return on capital > economic growth) as an argument regarding income disparity affecting our ability to have a dialogue within a republican form of government. Turns out, Pinketty was wrong… and the guy who flipped the card table was not only a 26 year old PhD candidate, but did it in the comments section of Marginal Revolution:
The comment blossomed into a near-unprecedented career opportunity for a student who just recently turned 26 years old, and who remains a year away from earning his doctoral degree. It will culminate on Friday morning at the Brookings Institution in Washington, where Rognlie will present a research paper before an often-cutthroat audience of all-star economists, including a Nobel Prize winner, Robert Solow, who will critique Rognlie’s analysis.
Organizers say it will almost certainly be the first paper at the prestigious Brookings Papers on Economic Activity that was commissioned based on a blog comment. It is also a rare honor for a graduate student to present a sole-authored paper there; a quick scan of Brookings records shows a similar appearance by the now-renowned economist Jeffrey Sachs when he was a doctoral student in 1979.
Fear not the comments section, folks. Just try to use your real name — no one takes a pseudonym seriously. Continue reading
Of is it the politicization of foreign affairs?
Officials in Washington said that the “chickenshit” epithet — with which an anonymous administration official branded Netanyahu several months ago — was mild compared to the language used in the White House when news of Netanyahu’s planned speech came in.
In his address the Israeli leader is expected to speak about stalled US-led nuclear negotiations with Iran, and to urge lawmakers to slap Tehran with a new round of tougher sanctions in order to force it to comply with international demands. The Mossad intelligence service on Thursday went to the rare length of issuing a press statement to deny claims, cited by Kerry, that its chief Tamir Pardo had told visiting US politicians that he opposed further sanctions.
So the Republicans talk to Likud; Democrats to Israeli Labour? Of course, before we get on our high horse about politics stopping at the waters’ edge (a principle I emphatically endorse), let’s not forget Speaker Pelosi’s trip to Damascus to meet with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad back in 2007 shortly after the Democrats took control of the U.S. House of Representatives.
Once the genie is out of the bottle, it’s hard to put him back in.
Nevertheless, it is impolitic at best to be labeling the leader of one of our closest allies in the Middle East as “chickenshit” in the middle of perhaps some of the most intense negotiations to broker a Palestinian peace.
When most presidents seem to focus on foreign affairs in their second term, President Obama seems to be failing miserably to establish concrete results when in 2008, his campaign had set the standards so very high. That’s unfortunate — because much more could and ought to be done… with less cowboy diplomacy, if one can borrow the term.
The RTD’s Jeff Schapiro opines on the bills concerning business and free enterprise moving through the 2015 General Assembly. I do have to give credit for a classic line:
The legislature has been in session only a week, but already the sturm und drang of an election year has become a screen behind which complex and costly issues unfold often unnoticed — until consumers get the bill.
The Fredericksburg Free Lance-Star doesn’t think the bill that would make “Our Great Virginia” our Virginia state anthem — set to the tune of “Shenandoah” and sponsored by Speaker Bill Howell — should be passed into law. To wit:
If Virginia is indeed in the mood to revisit the matter of its musical representation, it should consider its options.
The eight finalists from the old subcommittee remain on its website. They include an old Carter Family song, “Longing for Old Virginia.”
Its merits include a lack of offensive lyrics.
No offensive lyrics? I mean, if that’s a hurdle to jump then great start, I suppose…
But I digress. I’ve long argued that there are excellent alternatives, “Shenandoah” being one of them. Eddie From Ohio’s “Old Dominion” is a close second and a shop favorite here.
But for a really chest thumping anthem? One that really screams Virginia? You couldn’t do worse than “Jefferson and Liberty” could you?
The gloomy night before us flies,
The reign of terror now is o’er;
Its gags, inquisitors, and spies,
Its herds of harpies are no more!
Rejoice, Columbia’s sons, rejoice!
To tyrants never bend the knee,
But join with heart, and soul, and voice,
For Jefferson and Liberty!
No lordling here, with gorging jaws
Shall wring from industry the food;
Nor fiery bigot’s holy laws
Lay waste our fields and streets in blood!
Here strangers from a thousand shores
Compelled by tyranny to roam,
Shall find amidst abundant stores,
A nobler and happier home.
Here Art shall lift her laurelled head,
Wealth, Industry, and Peace, divine;
And where dark, pathless forests spread,
Rich fields and lofty cities shine.
From Europe’s wants and woes remote,
A friendly waste of waves between,
Here plenty cheers the humblest cot,
And smiles on every village green.
Here free as air, expanded space,
To every soul and sect shall be —
That sacred privilege of our race —
The worship of the Deity.
Let foes to freedom dread the name;
But should they touch the sacred tree,
Twice fifty thousands swords would flame
For Jefferson and liberty.
From Georgia to Lake Champlain,
From seas to Mississippi’s shore,
Ye sons of freedom loud proclaim —
“The reign of terror is no more.”
Now that’s a state anthem! Though one could suppose that mentions of “streets in blood” and “worship of the Diety” might be just a tad offensive for some more tender sentiments…