Link Sausage [Δαφνη Ευτυχια Αρθουρος]

Zombies attack American Idol audition, producers ask one of the zombies to audition. The gist:"Muntean organized the zombie horde using the online forum Craigslist. [...] Little did the zombies know that the 'American Idol' organizers had seen the Craigslist ad. 'We've been on 24-hour zombie watch,' said coordinating producer Patrick Lynn. 'We thought it would be fun to have them on the show.'" And a couple of random quotes I thought were cute: one of the zombies said before the attack, "I don't really know what the legal ramifications of a zombie horde are," and late in the article we get the deadpan, "The Austin Police Department says there is no history of zombie-related crime in the city."

"Why Coyote doesn't give commandments", by cadhla: a list of ten commandments the trickster god might give if he were the commandment-giving type. "IV. Adultery Is Actually Pretty Fun. Commit It All You Like. Just Make Sure Everyone Is Cool With It, Or I Will Not Help You Out Once the Hitting Gets Started. --- V. Thou Shalt Not Eat Poisoned Bait. If You Do, Don't Come Whining To Me About It, Because I Am Very Unlikely To Care. Once It Is In Your Mouth, It Is Your Problem, Not Mine. --- [...] VIII. Thou Shalt Not Be A Martyr [...]" Worth a read whatever your religion; wisdom as well as humour.

McSweeney's list of Klingon Fairy Tales -- just a list of titles; amusing, very quick read, more smile than LOL. Starts with "Goldilocks Dies With Honor at the Hands of the Three Bears" and ""Snow White and the Six Dwarves She Killed With Her Bare Hands and the Seventh Dwarf She Let Get Away as a Warning to Others"

"What Is Conservatism and What Is Wrong with It?" by Philip E. Agre starts off with the observation (which I've also heard from fidhle), that "most of the people who call themselves 'conservatives' have little notion of what conservatism even is." Historically, "Conservatism is the domination of society by an aristocracy," and thus fundamentally incompatible with democracy. Where it gets interesting is his explanation of how this definition, rather than just being etymological trivia, is actually relevant to current conservativism and why that's bad for most of us. Plenty of bits in here to go "Aha!" at, or to start lively arguments over. "Modern-day liberals often theorize that conservatives use 'social issues' as a way to mask economic objectives, but this is almost backward: the true goal of conservatism is to establish an aristocracy, which is a social and psychological condition of inequality. Economic inequality and regressive taxation, while certainly welcomed by the aristocracy, are best understood as a means to their actual goal, which is simply to be aristocrats." And: "Conservatism in every place and time is founded on deception. The deceptions of conservatism today are especially sophisticated, simply because culture today is sufficiently democratic that the myths of earlier times will no longer suffice." Plenty more such points. Read. Discuss. Just try to keep the discussion below the level of fisticuffs.

And just to make sure there's something here to piss off folks on both sides of the aisle, here's a convenient chart explaining How To Be A Good Democrat / How To Be A Good Republican. Snarkiness and oversimplification abound as each is cast as the other sees them. Some obvious bits, some that folks on one side or the other will actually believe and not recognize as exaggeration, some that may be accurate unless I've got the same intellectual blinders as the rest of my species, and some that are genuinely laughworthy clever. Read it for snark, read it for insight, read it for an excuse to get upset, read it for a giggle ... or don't. I don't think it even really tries to be fair, except at the level of annoying both sides, but it does have its "well if you put that in this context ... heh" moments. Probably funniest to third-party folks and moderates.

Compact and safe hydrogen storage -- a solid which releases hydrogen catalytically when needed and is safe enough to carry in your pocket (as long as you're not carrying the catalyst in the same pocket, I presume). The sidebar of links to related stories looks interesting as well. One quibble: they describe the space savings compared to an equivalent quantity of hydrogen gas at "normal pressure", but who stores a gaseous fuel at normal pressure? I'd be more interested in a comparison to typical tank pressures. (Yeah, I can Google that and do the math; I just think that they're cheating a bit in the article.) Recharge the storage solid by running ammonia into it. (Link thanks to keith_m043.)

Disaster relief timeline ... of a hundred years ago -- see how differently things were handled in 1906, before helicopters and cell phones. More concise rendering.

The $100 Laptop / One Laptop Per Child project at MIT is "a new research initiative to develop a $100 laptop -- a technology that could revolutionize how we educate the world's children." They want to be able to give children in developing nations computers that can create mesh networks on the fly, be carried between home and school, and use "innovative power" (the example given was wind-up). They want to make a hundred million of them and get them into the hands of governments willing to commit to a computer-per-child policy, and they hope to do this by late 2006 / early 2007. (Link thanks to yesthattom.)

The I Can Eat Glass Project "is based on the idea that people in a foreign country have an irresistable urge to try to say something in the indigenous tongue. In most cases, however, the best a person can do is 'Where is the bathroom?' a phrase that marks them as a tourist. But, if one says 'I can eat glass, it doesn't hurt me,' you will be viewed as an insane native, and treated with dignity and respect." So if you ant to know how to say that in about a hundred languages, now you know where to look it up. Including, of course, Klingon.

And finally, have a giggle at this squirrel altercation. Yes, there is more to it than that, and no, I don't think I can give more of a clue without spoiling it. Just put down your drink and click.

January

Sun	Mon	Tue	Wed	Thu	Fri	Sat
1 1	2 1	3 1	4 1	5 1	6 1	7 1
8 1	9 1	10 1	11 1	12 1	13 1	14 1
15 1	16 1	17 1	18 1	19 1	20 1	21 1
22 1	23 1	24	25	26	27	28
29	30	31

Sun

Mon

Tue

Wed

Thu

Fri

Sat

"[Error: Irreparable invalid markup ('

[Error: Irreparable invalid markup ('<a [...] [...]>') in entry. Owner must fix manually. Raw contents below.]

"[Error: Irreparable invalid markup ('<a [...] </a>') in entry. Owner must fix manually. Raw contents below.]"

[link] [reply]

If you put a "> after Zombies in the first line it should work.

No, actually that horrible URL is correct. The error is a bit later at the conservatism thing:

<a href="http://polaris.gseis.ucla.edu/pagre/conservatism.html"</a>

[link] [parent] [reply]

Ouch. Ouch. Agre's stuff is wildly inaccurate in terms of conservative political philosophy. The one part that is true is that many national politicians who call themselves conservative don't know what it means, but neither does Agre. He might want to read Burke first.

The question is just what is conservatism. In the original sense of the term, it referred to those who believed in such things as rule by an aristocracy and the church. Divine right of kings and all that. I daresay that there are very few conservatives in America by that definition. However, it is certainly true that modern "conservatives" are trying to enact policies that will tend to perpetuate advantage presently held by those at the upper end of society at the expense of those lower down the economic food chain. In that sense, the "tax cut" policies, especially the estate tax cuts and the overall tendency to spread the advantage of any tax cuts in a manner especially advantageous to those with the highest incomes, means that the children of the wealthy will end up wealthy, without having to work for it, and those of more modest means will inherit little or nothing. This will tend, over time, to create a class of privilege and a decrease of the middle class. Since I believe that it is the middle class which holds the nation together, I view this with great alarm. Please note that under the policies of the current administration, the wealthy have greatly increased their ownership of assets and we have a greater percentage of people in poverty than before.

The events in New Orleans merely illustrates the social disadvantages of these policies, not to mention the extreme incompetence of the Bush administration in dealing with "reality based" problems. This is not to be unexpected after a generation or so of propaganda about how the government is the problem and how the private sector is the best means of solving the problems facing our society. I read in the paper today that corporations associated with the cronies of Bush are reaping the benefit of the post-Katrina contracts, thus placing and concentrating wealth in the hands of those cronies.

Interestingly, the "tax cuts" and the consequent underfunding of the expenses of the government has the same effect since the government has to borrow, with interest, the money to make up that deficit. Of course, the people who reap the benefits of these interest payments are those who have the money to loan to the government in the first place. A perfect "conservative" result, income transfer from the poor through taxes to the wealthy through interest payments.

Enough writing, I'm getting a bit ramblingy.

This is a cartoon view of conservatism, just as caricatured as the cartoonish view of liberalism touted by many who call themselves conservative (or moderate).

In the original sense of the term, it referred to those who believed in such things as rule by an aristocracy and the church.

Er, um, no. Conservative political philosophy as described by Burke is far more a matter of distrusting dramatic social change for its own sake or for utopian claims made on behalf of social change. But that can often end up supporting actions that give people a stake in the society, in order to forestall more disruptive revolution. Thus, the new German state's support of social insurance in the late 19th century. And your definition of conservatism is at odds with historical conservatives. Burke, after all, proposed letting the colonies go.

It is the true conservative's skepticism of change that marks today's so-called conservatives as liars. The radical right's desires to remake America is definitely utopian, something that true conservatives chafe at.

I say this as someone who is definitely not a conservative in either the sense of political philosophy or modern political labels. But I like to be accurate in my understanding of political adversaries.

I think it would be fairer to characterize Burke as a liberal. He, after all, was opposed to the absolute power of the aristocracy. It is also a mistake to look at political labels only through Anglo/American eyes. Burke was a flaming, radical liberal compared to the French conservatives, those who lost many of their heads while he was still alive. That Burke would then criticize the French revolution, after seeing its excesses, is really not too surprising. Burke, after all, was living in a country that had the beginnings of democratic traditions, far more than almost any place in mainland Europe, and the "mob" mentality that was expressed in that revolution must have been frightening to most Britons.

If you will note, I didn't refer to Burke at all. The original article did, but not me. Also, I didn't really define "conservative." I referred to the original meaning. The difference between conservatives and liberal, in that sense, is really who should rule. Should it be an aristocracy based on inheritance, property, and religion, or should it be rule by the people. Thus, when I speak of conservatives, I mean those who are in favor of inheritance, property, breeding and wealth as the proper basis for being in the ruling elite, and liberals are those who are in favor of the people governing themselves, with limits being placed on the tyranny of the majority. The US is a liberal government with a liberal Constitution. Those who were opposed to the liberal US government were encouraged to move to British possessions, such as Canada and Jamaica, often forcibly. As I said in my post, I don't really believe that there are many "conservatives," as I mean the term, in this country. Rather, the term "conservative," which has many good connotations BTW, is really more of a comparative term indicating those who, as you say, are skeptical of change. If you view the political spectrum along a willingness to accept change, the conservatives want to go slower than the liberals, but both have similar objectives. At the radical end of the spectrum, Communism and Fascism, although radically different from each other in theory, the two ends seem to meet in terms of political tools and techniques. Neither have proven satisfactory as a means of assuring freedom or prosperity.

To claim that there is any "original" meaning of the term conservatism is to assert that Maistre—who certainly was an advocate of authoritarian monarchalism—is the paradigmatic conservative, and that there could be no other. Moreover, it implies that Maistre's version of conservatism is the direct antecedent of today's self-labeled conservative politicians, who exist in a representative republic. I find that a pretty big stretch, even moreso than the claim that the president is a true conservative.

While I may be wrong, incidentally, I suspect that the only realm in which Burke has something in common with "classical liberals" in the 19th-century sense is in the economic sphere, where he disdained government interference. But it wasn't for the same reasons as 19th century liberals. Burke was no fan of liberty as a general principle (and he would have scoffed at the notion of general political principles in general, except ones relying on tradition and religion).

Why would a Klingon make a point of saying something doesn't cause pain?

Something along the lines of "I eat glass. It is a warrior's meal," would be more in character.

You have to believe that this letter is part of a vast, right-wing conspiracy.

Actually, I do find the letter rather right-wing.:P

Δαφνη Ευτυχια Αρθουρος

Link Sausage

(no subject)

(no subject)

(no subject)

(no subject)

(no subject)

(no subject)

(no subject)

(no subject)

(no subject)

(no subject)

Links

January