Pitchfork 138

rights and contracts, executives and workers

2008-12-22T06:58:00.007-05:00

Human rights are trumps - safety nets, thresholds, personal securities - that protect individuals/groups from both the majority and minorities. Thus, utilitarian politics intends the greatest good for the greatest number so long as rights are never sacrificed. Thus, ideological stamina remains triumphant only to the extent that each and every life, liberty and pursuit of happiness is protected without discrimination. Thus, the entire spectrum of rights is universally applicable, equally desirable and without hierarchy of importance. This is all especially true in times of emergency and crisis - when rights are most vulnerable to whim, public opinion and fear.

Two common examples include the death penalty and the so-called 'war on terror', where the right to life and the right to not be tortured have been directly denied to countless individuals, respectively. Both cases see attempts at justification through standard lists that invoke rationalities about justice, protection, retribution, deterrence, etc. At this point human rights are no longer protected; instead discrimination is rampant, equality is denied, and dignity is sacrificed.

The current financial crisis, however, has brought about another important example where rights have been put in jeopardy to protect not only the majority but also an absurdly small minority. In a time of economic crisis where decisions of 'the best and the brightest' brought along the pending collapse of several industries, rights still remain trumps. And it is the most fundamental role of government to guarantee this - to protect individual rights through military (against foreign threats), through police security (against domestic threats) and through enforcing contracts (against fellow individuals). This final aspect is being unjustly threatened from all sides do to coordinated misinformation, populist utilitarianism (liberals), and elite looting and mooching (conservatives). Not only must we protect the contracts of the executives but we must equally ensure that of the workers - whether they are at the helm of the financial industry or collectively organized under the United Auto Workers - and at the same time we should hold accountable the real culprits. In the case of AIG, no matter how awful the taste the contracts should be executed if they were sound, yet the politicians/regulators who allowed for them in the first place should see no hope for re-election and not a damn dime of campaign support come 2010/2012.

Maintaining this consistency, union contracts have the unique caveat that financial hardships must be proven before any particulars must be adjusted or renegotiated. Even in stalemate, independent arbitration can also be on the table if not already a part of the applicable labor law. The sanctity of their contract should be just as inviolable as that of the bankers - not subject to populist outrage or the myth about $70/hour wages (truth: UAW members only make a few dollars more than unorganized workers with foreign automakers, the $70 lie is the total payment wages, benefits and pensions to every living worker and former worker of an industry that has been around for over 100 years divided by an existing workforce, itself dramatically smaller than even a decade ago due to outsourcing). Just because there is a crisis at hand does not mean that these workers, present and retired, are in no less need of their compensation. Further, if we fail to protect the rights of these workers - that which is guaranteed under existing contracts - the effects will be adverse to everybody's rights. If their contracts are on the table, then so are the bankers', then so are everybody's mortgages, then so is every contract. Maybe not tomorrow or even next week, but the violation of rights is a slippery slope.

Finally, and this itself is just as important a point, the government - an arm of the citizen taxpayer - should under no circumstances be financially supporting any of these groups, contract or no contract. If the financial industry collapsed, then that is the market at work - till something better rises from its ashes (think Atlas Shrugged). If the big three collapse, then that is the market at work - protectionism of domestic industries is neither desirable nor patriotic. We cannot be picking winners and losers. Subsidies, tax abatements, bailouts, predictive regulation, it's all crap and what got us in the mess in the first place. Protect rights, enforce contracts, and let everything else alone.

Don't Bail Me Out Either

2008-12-12T06:33:00.002-05:00

Although it may appear that only two options are on the table, this is once again nonsense.

Robert Gates, an Inside Man

2008-12-03T21:42:00.003-05:00

Current Secretary of Defense Robert Gates has been officially tapped to indefinitely retain his current position in the incoming administration. Overall, this is a generally positive development. Gates has done a good job in the post so far, even bucking the current administration on some very important issues regarding Iraq. Some moderate progressives have even gone so far as to suggest that he might be one of the best Defense Secretary's in history. That is debatable but he has obviously handled the job in a post-partisan manner, which stands as a very promising aspect of his potential to handle the job successfully in the future. The huge, obvious downside to Gates is that he has an (R) next to his name. This isn't necessarily a political jab suggesting that only Democrat's must control everything. To the contrary, there could be a tremendous advantage having a republican in charge of State instead of Defense, such that diplomacy is emphasized as an attractive quality for Republicans/Conservatives. Nonetheless, Gates will do fine.

I would, however, like to tout a very important short-term benefit of Gates that didn't become clear to me until I saw him standing on the stage when announced. Obama is his boss now. That's a big deal with a lame duck President who is antithetical to the incoming administration and quite suspect of conspiratorial tendencies. Thus, Obama has essentially laid claim to Defense Policy in the most immediate instances by contracting an inside man.

This is NOT a Center-Right Country

2008-11-06T08:39:00.008-05:00

There's been a lot of talk by the pundits this week - before and after the election - about the United States being a very center-right country. Comments here and there about how Obama, despite supposedly being the most liberal member of the Senate, floated to the center. It gets said with relentless repetition and then incorporated into the media's conventional wisdom until those in Washington embrace it.

"In my line of work, you gotta keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in - to kinda catapult the propaganda." -George W. Bush

How interesting... "to catapult the propaganda."

These are the tactics of those talking heads on the right. They ignore the reality that over half the country just voted overwhelmingly for the Democrats just as they did in 2006. And so they stick to their absurd reality that no matter what the vote is, no matter how overwhelming the mandate becomes, no matter how awful the reaction to McCain's embrace of hardline conservative economics or Palin's extreme social conservatism... the permeating victory for the left means absolutely nothing. And thus politicians must act Republican.

However, the truth is that those on the right just got their ass handed to them. Apparently the American people think they are terrible. So there is no reason to believe that anyone should want to act more like them.

Once again. The wrong lessons have been learned. This is what happens when reality is not accepted: climate change, a lost war, increasing inequality, and ironically evolution. To their own demise.

nature's hint for the answer to truth and reconciliation?

2008-04-16T20:23:00.004-04:00

"Thus, our studies of salamanders are revealing that the regeneration process can be divided into pivotal stages, beginning with the wound healing response, followed by the formation of a blastema by cells that revert to some degree to an embryonic stage, and finally, the initiation of a developmental program to build the new limb. As we move toward the challenge of inducing limb regeneration in humans, we rely on these insights to guide our efforts. Indeed, the hardest things to discover in science are those that do not already occur, and limb regeneration in humans fits snugly into this category, although that does not mean humans have no natural regenerative capacity."

Muneoka, Ken, Manjong Han and David M. Gardiner "Regrowing Human Limbs" 298 Scientific American 56 (2008), at 61

Also in this issue, a cover story about the chlorophyl coloring of alien plants... not necessarily green. It all depends on the type and distance from the closest star.

on racism: an email to my mom

2008-03-27T04:39:00.005-04:00

First of all, I'm not sure that I can factually disagree at all with the things said in Pastor Wright's sermon. The tone is obviously very abrasive, yet the events that he refers to are all very much true. I have encountered numerous articles, books, speakers by Americans and non-Americans, both white and non-white, that engage in the same sort of analysis about the United States' involvement around the world. The most credible of them are actually produced by Noam Chomsky of MIT who is lauded as one of the world's most influential intellectuals. He routinely points out the parallels between our country's involvement in the past and conflict that we are currently engaged in. Pastor Wright referred to a very long history of events going back to the Native Americans, World War II, and right into the present. One in particular that you might be interested to learn about is the School of the Americas located at Fort Benning in Columbus Georgia. For the past several decades (but most intensely during the Cold War), this training facility has educated foreign soldiers from throughout Latin America who were sent back to their home countries to lead militias and State military in savage and oppressive conflicts known collectively as the "dirty wars" where thousands of people, including young children, were murdered, tortured, disappeared, raped, or imprisoned. For what reason? To inflict fear in the populations and squash any dissent whatsoever. Not only are these individual acts considered war crimes, they are collectively considered to be acts of terrorism -- whereas violence is used to inflict fear for purposes of persuasion. That is state terrorism. Now, just because the soldiers were trained in the United States doesn't mean that we are responsible for every single thing that happens after they left Fort Benning. Yet this is only true to some degree. It wasn't just a few soldiers. It has been numerous, very high-profile individuals who entered through the School of the Americas, and it is absurd to believe that we just trained all these soldiers out of our own generosity and then never thought twice about them again. On the contrary, we most definitely utilized our enormous power and influence to instigate and control as much as possible everything that happened in those countries. It's not even something to be necessarily ashamed about. Rich and powerful countries (especially superpowers) do those sorts of things. And poor, weak countries do those sorts of things too, when they can. Human beings do those sorts of things. It's just a natural reality. And I highly doubt any modern state authority sits around thinking "Gee, I'd sure like to train a bunch of foreign soldiers to go and murder a bunch of defenseless people!" There are, however, plenty of ones that do go "I am a person of authority in a country that is thriving on an ideology of capitalism and there are a bunch of very poor & disgruntled people in Argentina who under democratic conditions would undoubtedly vote a socialist or communist party into power. This would be a threat for my capitalist country whose greatest enemy is communist and hates my country because it is capitalist. We should definitely find some people down in those countries who we can train to defeat the democratic urge. Brutal violence and war is a risk we are be willing to take, after all it's not our country..." Anyways, you have that happening in Latin America. But similar historical things take place in Southeast Asia (... Vietnam War). Similar things happen in the Middle East, especially in Iran and Afghanistan. For whatever reasons right or wrong on our behalf, it all happens. What has not happened, however, is the most important thing today. We rarely ever leave! The Soviet Union collapsed nearly 20 years ago and we still have military in almost every country in the world. I will admit that I am not one to be unappreciative or unsupportive of the fact that myself, my family, other people in my country, and much of the world is probably safer and more comforted as a result even if they don't know it. But, there are millions of people around the world who rightfully feel much different. That is the history of the United States that Pastor Wright was alluding to. Our history of violence around the world were the "chickens" and the fact that 19 men slipped by in very deadly and disastrous way was the "coming home to roost." It's not that he's condoning what those men did, but there can be no rational belief that we haven't been pissing off to great lengths millions and millions of people for decades.

Unfortunately, and also my second point, he lost that message in the method of his delivery. He is obviously a very passionate person and a very emotional person, but I do believe he failed to clarify that he wasn't neither approving of the attacks nor legitimizing the many deaths as justified. That much is obviously to his own discredit. But, in his own defense I do believe as Obama did a good job of pointing out, the power of Pastor Wright's whole ministry and the spirit of his and many other black churches are the embodiment of the gospel as a part of their own lives. The heroes, stories, and lessons of the Bible aren't just historical anomalies formulating the Christian faith, they are the life of the Church. And the Church today is our lives as Christians. Christianity is a religion of the oppressed, the poor, the wretched. "It is harder for a rich man to go to heaven than it is for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle." Persecution is a fundamental element of being a Christian. And what better group of Americans than Blacks to embody such a crucial reality of the faith. I truly do believe, at least in my church experience in Virginia and Georgia, that the typical American Christian experience has forsaken that part of the religion. It is almost rewarding to be in England where Christians are in the relative minority and there has been tension for centuries as the Church's presence has weakened. I think the point of Pastor Wright is that there is undoubtedly a historical and also present division within the United States, between white and non-white, rich and poor, men and women. It is not the treacherous slavery that it once was long ago. It is not the legalized discrimination that it was only a few decades ago. It is, however, still here. And thus I think the point of Barack Obama is that this is an honest opportunity when the entire country is listening very closely, if for nothing else than to not lie to ourselves that the problem doesn't still exist on some level.

Finally, my third point. There are two types of racism at issue. The first is a racism of superiority (whites). The second is a racism of bitterness (both whites and non-whites). I know you are more of a witness to the Civil Rights movement that you grew up in and have obviously encountered good change in laws, attitudes, and opportunities of blacks ever since. But, there is another important part of that same period outside of the South that did not encounter such positive results. Segregation in the South was much more in-your-face and official: separate facilities; voting restrictions; racist violence. Segregation in the North on the other hand wasn't so matter of fact. Blacks who had moved out of the South from the ending of slavery until that time period predominantly clustered into cities, low-income neighborhoods, and generally areas where anybody starting from scratch could have some sort of a chance. This meant that they, for the most part, were the only ones in the cities or districts that they lived in. Schools didn't have to be segregated because no blacks lived within a reasonable distance of the white schools to begin with. This brought a much colder under-the-radar racism. The white owners of banks didn't have to make racist rules to deny loans or financing to improve neighborhoods. They could just draw red lines around the low income areas and that was that. This not only targeted blacks but also anybody of the lower class. Sure "red-lining" has since become illegal and other similar practices are much more highly regulated, but the mindset itself can never be fought with laws and there will always be loopholes, whites who move out of neighborhoods when non-whites start to move in, etc. This kind of racism can't be fought with Supreme Court cases or non-discrimination laws (although those legalistic methods obviously help and will continue to do so as they accumulate). Sure, you can say white people encounter the same problems getting loans, health care, good education, and that both white and non-whites have done an amazing job overcoming obstacles to empower themselves. But, that doesn't mean there isn't something wrong at a much deeper level.

I don't believe that our country is overtly and hatefully racist apart from a few bad apples. I don't think affirmative action policies are a good solution, yet I'm not sure what else would be either. But I do think that there is a very problematic problem where all Americans of all backgrounds are experiencing economic segregation that is only getting worse and worse. Despite large numbers of clearly successful blacks and other non-whites, the clear majority of these groups falls into the lower ends of this spectrum of discrimination. That, in itself, whether a result of targeted-skin-color-racism or not, is a profound matter of endemic racism. Forget about the thousands of blacks who every year get sentenced to life imprisonment and death penalties in comparison to the dozens of whites who commit the same crimes. Forget about the blacks who get threatened or attacked by racist fanatics. That racism absolutely still does exist, but those instances are relics of the past that are minor acts of law reform away from disappearing. The racism that we can't forget about is the kind where having the right to vote doesn't matter much when you rely on poorly funded transportation and enjoying that right means taking several additional hours out of your day (childcare? additional bus fare? missing work?), or when the right to a fair trial and due process doesn't seem to help you even if you're innocent because your area's court system doesn't have the resources to efficiently process all of its cases and you can't afford a good lawyer to help you fast-track the process (stigmatized in your community? missing more work? bitterness?), or when the right to freedom of expression and religion doesn't seem to matter much when the whole country lashes out you and the community that supports you for relating your faith to reality and fact. That kind of economic/social/cultural discrimination becomes racism when the majority of your race experiences it regardless of the fact that those in the majority race may experience it as well. It doesn't make it right that whites are experiencing it either, but it helps to distinguish that blacks as a factor of their history may experience it on a different, colder level.

A perfect example I think to close with is the proposed monorail from Norfolk to the oceanfront a few years ago. Norfolk has more crime than Virginia Beach. That is an undisputed fact. A monorail that would facilitate such crime coming to the oceanfront was very rightfully questioned and possibly for the better it was voted down. There may have been and probably were many who saw that crime problem was a "blacks in Norfolk" problem. That type of racism would have been squashed without hesitation for good reason, but nonetheless the logic of the higher crime rates made that a non-issue. The more disastrous racism, however, was that the discourse for those still in Virginia Beach ended there. For those still in Norfolk, the crime problem does not disappear when the monorail project to bring tourist dollars into Virginia Beach is abandoned. For those still in Norfolk, getting to the oceanfront or anywhere else in Virginia Beach for a better job might still require taking a bus or spending too much money on gas to make it worth it. For those still in Norfolk, enlisting in the military is not about how they always loved war movies or because their dad and grandfather was a Navy SEAL or a pilot, but rather that they need a way out and their world puts that option high on the list. For those still in Norfolk, growing up without a dad is not about two parents who couldn't make marriage work, it's about two young parents who never got married in the first place with potentially four very young grandparents who never got married in the first place. Think about that financially. If the grandmother raised a daughter as a single parent who is now raising another child as a single parent, that's only one grandparent who is offering financial assistance to the family. In contrast, you have a fully-married family with four grandparents helping their two young married children reduced to one single grandmother helping one single mom. Even with the same incomes, that reduces income level going into supporting a family from 6 to 2 people. Then consider that the same young, single-mother families who got pregnant before getting married are probably going to get unexpectedly pregnant another time at least. So reading all of that, who are you picturing mostly in those situations...? That's racism whether you like it or not. Yes, we can sit here and say that any of those issues could be both white or black problems, and that is completely true. But here is what is also true. Think about all the bad and good things comparatively about living in both Virginia Beach and Norfolk. Think about all the civil and political rights that all American citizens legally share with each other no matter which city they live in or which color their skin is. Think about the military spending that just reached over a trillion dollars while we still refuse to pay teachers, to provide health care, or to continue financially supporting museums and scientific research programs. Think about all those types of problems that each city has and shares on some level and then think about where the money comes from to fix those problems in the end if at all. Now based on those assumptions, think about which city you would choose to live in. Virginia Beach is 71.1% white. Norfolk is 48.4% white. That's racism.

These problems aren't futile. They can be overcome. Taking the bus does not mean someone cannot vote. Having a poorly funded court system that gives heavier sentences to non-whites does not mean someone must commit a crime in the first place. Having freedom of speech and religion does not give anyone the right to offend without discretion (but just that they should not be legally punished for doing so). But it is going to take a lot of work to convince those who face such challenges that it is worth the effort to do otherwise, whether white or black. And it is worth the effort. It is worth the bus ride. It is worth working an unappealing job and focusing on educating oneself if it means not being a criminal to get by "easier". It is worth it because all that effort even with limited or non-existent results is an act of empowerment. Whereas failure is acceptable, feeling too overwhelmed to try is a path to doom. We learn from mistakes and we grow collectively. So no, I do not feel any differently about Barack Obama because of the untactful remarks of his pastor. If nothing else, I feel even more excited that he is about to be our President and the leader of the entire planet. It won't be an end to all of our problems, and definitely not even close to the end of racism. But, it's a start. A lot of unconventional groups of people are excited and engaged in politics for the first time. A lot of people see their chance (black and white) to find a different kind of interest in their country and society as a whole. They may be ready to move beyond experiencing life as individuals. They may find themselves more destined to taking routes in life that seemed a impractical in the past. We'll see. Can't promise anything, but not sure if I'm willing to risk putting it off any longer. I'll tell you right now, Obama is probably gonna piss you and the rest of the country off more than a few times. Maybe in a completely different way than a Bush or a McCain would do, but he's gonna do it if he's effective by any means. It won't be about him being black. It won't be about his "lack of experience." It'll just be different and it'll be a change, maybe a change that people aren't expecting or even aware is possible. But, I really do believe it takes that kind of unease and discomfort when the change is happening for the next generation to feel positive about it all as if it were just the way things always were.

Well. I think I'll end there. Wrote way too much, but in a good way for me too I think it helped me organize my own thoughts about all of it too. I guess the real test will be to see how I feel in the future.

IT Revolution insight into Environmental Dilemma

2007-12-06T10:39:00.002-05:00

Former American President Bill Clinton once mentioned that the 1990s greatest endeavor was the IT revolution. More recently, however, he has asserted that energy problems have taken the helm. I think the possibilities for comparison of these two technological endeavors is very interesting and could be a key insight into a solution for the current environmental saga, obviously including the supposed perils of global warming made popular by Clinton's vice-president and nobel laureate Al Gore. It is my understanding that the IT revolution, more popularly experienced as the internet revolution, was easily taken on because of the hype surrounding it and the infamous "bubble" that made millions of young minds long for easy money. For instance, it is no myth that the past generation and much of the current one has become infatuated with gadget technology, computer and video gaming, online social networking, ipods, etc. How did we get to this point so abruptly? As Thomas Friedman pointed out in The World is Flat, it was partly from over-investment in transcontinental fiber-optic cables that connected the globe at breakneck, broadband capacity. True, this investment bankrupted many of the initial investors who had the foresight to plant the cables. But the remnant has been a vast infrastructure leaving the talents of computer engineers, computer scientists, programmers and technology investors to take on more creative pursuits. Sure there will always be room for improvement of the infrastructure, instances that prompt an ironing out of quirks, and unfortunately times when things simply breakdown. But we are not standing around wishing for high-speed internet, computers fast enough to handle demanding software, or the practical personal knowledge about how to use all the technology so conveniently at our fingertips.

Why can't we do the same thing with the realm of environmental technology. All we really lack is the infrastructure. The demand is there for alternative energy. The need is there. The potential brainpower is there. We just don't have the infrastructure. So how do we overcome this? At this point, I'm not sure I am an authority of minute policy that would get to such ends. But the basic idea is that we should aim to induce and foster a "fascination" with environmental/fuel technology/science that creates a similar rush of young minds towards a "quick buck" in that area. Maybe this can be done through educational subsidies, popular culture objectives, or however. The goal is not to just make this become an "important" agenda, which mostly everyone on the planet accepts... but that it becomes a romantic agenda with profitable ends, a thirsty market, and maybe even a similar joy that the kids today get out of glaring into a monitor.

Science for the Sake of Science

2007-07-05T11:04:00.000-04:00

Let's start from this basic point. You may have heard MGM's latinized-Bohemian slogan Ars Gratia Artis typically translated into English as "Art for art's sake," but the more common interpretation for the word ars is actually SCIENCE. So, I present to you now an argument for scientific literacy, science for science's sake, and science ultimately for your own sake.

disclaimer: this is a my paraphrased adaption of a D.J. Grothe, Center of Inquiry interview with Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Natalie Angier about her most recent book The Canon: A Whirligig Tour of the Beautiful Basics of Science

Some researchers say that society is at a turning point much like during the Renaissance when reading literacy became a norm for economic survival. Scientific literacy today is the equivalent of that. Aside from learning science because it may advance us economically, and that it keeps us informed as voting citizens for the big questions that have to do with the science-public policy interface like global warming and stem cell research, why should we learn science? Are we really supposed to be scientifically literate just because... it's good for us? Many people are just dimly aware when it comes to science, and this is a tragedy considering the many cool ideas that are out there for scientific discussion. On a broader plane, however, everybody can and should participate in the scientific adventure of understanding the universe on its own terms.

Only 7% of Americans are scientifically literate. Most Americans don't know the difference between an atom and a molecule. (And whether they believe it or not) most Americans aren't knowledgeable about Darwin's evolutionary theory. Does it really matter that someone like myself is telling you to appreciate science just because its interesting to me? A lot of musicians say that people should appreciate the local symphony because its interesting to them. But do you really need to know science to live a happy, fulfilled life? When making coffee in the morning, do you really need to know astronomy to do so? I guess not, but honestly you can say that about almost anything. You don't have to listen to or even know about any music to be able to do anything. Yet whether it was by choice or lack of exposure, what an impoverished life you would have without experiencing music at all. The same can be said about all types of art and even science.

There is a natural fascination with science when we are young. Go to a museum and you will see that it is alive with children. They are excited. They are running around. They want to understand and experiment with the world. And they like it for the sake of itself. Science for the sake of science. They're not trying to learn to be better citizens or make more money. It's just fun. Even as an adult, one can remember looking up at a clear night sky full of stars and being taken away by the magical feeling of it all. But go ask Joe Citizen if they can name a living scientist, and chances are you'll hear a few too many people tell you Al Gore. What's even more interesting is that although parents typically have a tendency to push their sons and daughters away from professional careers in the arts, they don't discourage their childrens' appreciation for it. The truth is that not everyone is going to be a professional scientist, but they can still appreciate science and should be encouraged to do so. Because when you do, it can enrich your life just like music and art. It is interesting to note that several Nobel Prize winners (and even non-accoladed scientists too) often refer to the beauty of science NOT the utility of it. They allude science to watching sunsets. They look at mathematical equations and the structures of crystals with the same appreciation as most others do with more conventional "beautiful" things. These same people often work long, tedious hours into the night, without direct non-posthumous appreciation from the general public, and at not terribly high salaries. Yet they are still excited about their work and results, and many would say they tend to be perfectly happy with the life that they have chosen.

Think back to your school years. Was chemistry one of your least favorite subjects? Maybe it wasn't the subject matter that lost your attraction but just the way we teach chemistry in our society. Interestingly enough, chemists feel like the underappreciated of the scientific community because even they know that their subject is the most disliked. And let's face it, we all know plenty of people who probably flunked a chemistry course at some point (I almost did my first year at Georgia Tech while being taught literally by the person who wrote the book, Professor Block). Chemists can also be ignored easily by those in other fields like physics and biology. BUT, chemists actually feel that they are the closest to artists of science because they are creating things. Chemists are generally engaged in creating new molecules or variances of existing molecules to obtain new properties. For example, chemists are working on computer screens that you can literally roll up like a piece of paper and take with you. And since there is an enormous environmentalist push right now to make biodegradeable things like shopping bags, chemists are also trying to make such bags that will biodegrade AND obviously do so sufficiently long after you are done carrying them home from the store.

So, don't you think it's important to at least have a basic understanding of what molecules are? Just back to the basics stuff: what they are, how they interact, why they have the properties they do. With these building blocks, we can all follow more competently with developments in medical design, applied science, etc. Likewise with biology, a suprising majority of people don't really know what cells are. How on Earth then can they possibly follow any news on the stem-cell debate with any competency? Just one more perfect example of why we need to know simple things like what atoms are, as well as the other most basic principles of astronomy, geology, physics, biology, and chemistry.

Think about it. Have you ever read a news article about scientific developments and practically every bit of information, even general background stuff, seemed like news to you? You're not alone. Obviously no one can be knowledgeable about everything concerning every field-science or not--but just having a working familiarity with basic principles about the different disciplines can make things easier. Here's a few hightlighted points to get you started...

(Geology) Why is Earth different than the other planets? Our large-sized, rocky planet has had heat trying to escape from the core since the formation of our solar system, and that has shaped the history of our entire planet--from the first Volcano to Hurricane Katrina. Mars, on the other hand, is smaller and has lost most of its heat resulting in a pretty much dead planet.
(Astronomy) How do astronomers study the universe? I don't think you'll find any lab full of stars and planets where scientists are tinkering away with instruments. The information astronomers use is in the light beams that come to them with stories to tell. So, don't always think about dark night skies when astronomy comes to mind. It's all about light. We have learned so much about everything we know--what's out there, how far things are away from us, and even theory concerning the big bang and extraterrestrial life--just by studying these extraordinary rays of light.

Don't think of this learn-science-idea as one of those "It's good for you, so do it" kind of things. It's not a chore. Think of it as a beautiful thing that has so much out there, it'll make you feel happy to be alive. And most importantly for the sake of this blog, it'll make you feel happy to help others fully experience their lives through your social activism and advocacy.

Natalie Angier's book The Canon is available at Amazon.com and probably in most bookstores. Or for just a whirligig tour of her whirligig tour, download the podcast of her Point of Inquiry interview or subscribe with iTunes. Also, Natalie's website has information about her many other diverse books and writings. Hope you had a happy Fourth of July kids. Don't be to mystified if next year you find yourself asking why fireworks... work? Lame in the '07.

-not a scientist

a bunch of things to do besides buying an iPhone

2007-07-02T11:05:00.000-04:00

Sorry iPhone. You're just an easy $600 + $XXX/year service plan target this week and a valid example of consumer culture and hype, but you have also compelled me to encourage my fellow activists to reboot. So here is a little list of things we can all do right now/later today/this week/whenever to get our bearings straight. By reconnecting with some of those things we might not be making time for throughout our increasingly busy lives, we will be making ourselves better social activists and defenders of human rights. And most importantly, it's important to enjoy our lives while fighting for others to do the same.

Read a book: check out Rachel's summer reading post for some good suggestions. Also, I'm currently reading An Ordinary Man by Paul Rusesabagina, The Neocon Reader edited by Irwin Stelzer, The Accidental Mind by David J. Linden, and Rant: An Oral Biography of Buster Casey by Chuck Palahniuk.
Walk your dog: healthy dogs need to be walked at least twice a day for a half-hour each time, preferably for an hour-and-a-half total. When you get back, reward your four legged friend with his food. This will simulate the hunt that dogs in nature would do every day for up to 14 hours. And best of all, you will get some exercise too. Everybody wins.
Board games: gather some friends and blow the dust off your collection. Don't take things too seriously though, Just enjoy the company of the people you enjoy. Make some healthy snacks as well.
Try out some new recipes: i've spent the last few months mastering my foreman grill. Although it's a small platform, i've still had lots of fun making things on my own, saving money, and enjoying dishes that taste better than most things you'd find at restaurants.
Raid the magazine shelf at a big-chain bookstore: why do Barnes & Nobles and Borders have cafes and other areas to read in? Because they don't want you to buy anything, of course. Go up to the magazine rack, grab every magazine that has any topic on the cover that looks appealing, make sure to get some diversity (news, science, tech, music, art, trade), throw in a couple of those teen magazines for fun, find a place to sit, READ! You don't have to read cover-to-cover. In fact, that's a horrible way to read. Just read through the stuff that looks interesting or "important" to know, and then go on to the next one. Don't shy away from things you aren't familiar with like other religions, sciences, genres. Repeat every couple of weeks and watch your brain grow.
Write a letter: pick out a case or two from our Individuals at Risk that is compelling to you and then throw some ink down. A hand-crafted letter can be very compelling on the desks of officials when next to a pile of form letters.
Go to the park: picnic, jog, throw/kick a ball, cook-out, ride a bike. The outdoors are fun, especially during the summer. If there's a larger public park near you (i.e., Piedmont Park in Atlanta), you'll probably be pleasantly suprised to realize how many interesting events are going on that you'd otherwise have no idea about.
Make some art: here's this one idea I have always wanted to try. Track down a "how-to guide" about a different art form, then make that type of art. Never sculpted? Sculpt. Never learned origami? Fold. Never made your own clothes? Sew what. You don't have to be an artist. But who knows, you might have this bulging right brain under that skull of yours. Let it out.
Take some pictures: black and white, digital. Whatev. Capture it.
Put a twist on your recreation: play flag football with socks at the beach at night, urban frisbee golf (just walk outside, pick a target for the first hole... shoot; pick new "hole" from end of previous hole; repeat x18 throughout town), or even good ol' fashion kickball.
Make your own list: I can only be so creative and all-inclusive from behind the intern desk.
Comment: before you log-off to take on the world, the IAR bloggers would love to hear from you. We are young and still learning, which is why we'd love know what we're doing good/bad and if you're even reading at all.

The only world that wouldn't need human rights

2007-06-29T11:05:00.000-04:00

is a world without humans.

As the Supreme Court hacks away at a half-century-old civil rights victory (some case known as Brown v. Board of Education, you may have heard of it), as China equivocates its role in the Sudan crisis, and as the folks within the beltway try to figure out just which branch of the government the Vice President is a part of, the gang at Scientific American have published an interview with Alan Weisman about his new book The World Without Us. When Weisman, a Laureate Associate Professor in Journalism and Latin American Studies at the University of Arizona, was posed with the question about what a world without humans would be like, he was politely skeptical. But after thinking about the unlikely yet plausible possibility of an extraterrestial invasion, human-specific global virus, or possibly even a reenactment of chapter 23 "Obsolete" in Chuck Palahniuk's Haunted, Alan reconsidered the proposition and was intrigued.

What would happen you ask? I'm not one for spoilers, so here is a good assortment of explanations for all types:

short attention span? Scientific American's July 2007 article "An Earth Without People"

visual learner? video companion to Scientific American's "An Earth Without People"

bookworm? Alan Weisman's The World Without Us on Amazon.com

geek? Scientific American's 6/27/07 "Science Talk" podcast interviewing Alan Weisman

etc? Scientific American's "Timeline: The Fall of New York City"

Although it's realistically only a 30th century end to the human rights debate, take it as food for thought in 2007. Besides, isn't the world a lot more interesting with us living in it.

Meles Zenawi... a bad boy

2007-06-29T10:57:00.000-04:00

There are plenty of socially conscious individuals in the world. Some, however, are more passionate than others. What makes one more passionate? Is it how much you care? Is it that you spread the word, write letters, or actively defend the rights of your fellow species. I have one barometer. Prison time!

Following the May 2005 elections in Ethiopia, dissent arose in the streets of Addis Ababa. The opposition Coalition for United and Democracy (CUD) party won a large handful of positions in the Ethiopian government, but unfortunately head of state/govt was not among the mix. Election fraud was accused of the cause. Thus in the months of June and November 2005, the CUD organized sympathizers to protest the elections and even refused to take the seats that they had won themselves. Come November, the peaceful demonstrations were confronted by Ethiopian security forces resulting in the deaths of 80 opposition supporters and seven police officers. Then, nearly 10,000 opposition supporters were arrested by the Meles regime. Although thankfully only a few hundred still remain in jail, those on trial include nine of the newly-elected CUD members of Ethiopian Parliament, 14 journalists who merely covered the demonstrations, and various academics and lawyers. The symbolic figurehead of those on trial is renowned human rights defender Professor Mesfin Woldemariam, founder of the Ethiopian Human Rights Council. Mesfin has spent the last thirty years combating poverty in Ethiopia and exposing the failures of previous regimes to protect its people from famine and drought. After retiring from teaching to join the CUD, Mesfin became an influential figure within the party. So, Mesfin as well as many of the other disssenters are being tried merely for their natural right to holding an opinion and voicing such thought. They are prisoners of conscience held for political reasons by the Meles regime.

But what if their dissent lead to the violence in the streets circa 2005? Should that make them guilty of the remaining charges against them and therefore eligible for the death penalty or life imprisonment? These POCs are facing such questions themselves now. But one of two recent developments has rumored that a deal is possible between those 38 prisoners convicted a few weeks ago. If agreeing to accept CUD's responsibility as an entity for the violence, the prisoners could be allowed to go free. (Not the most honorable way to earn their release, but who am I to keep them from their family and freedom.)

The second development, however, throws a wrench in the case. Two Ethiopian Human Rights bills (HR 2003 and HR 2228 available at thomas.loc.gov) are going through the House of Reps right now that would publically shame the Meles regime, prevent Ethiopian human rights offenders from obtaining visas into the United States, and implement various restrictions on aid from the likes of the State Dept, DoD, etc. Great news huh? It should be except that Prime Minister Meles is scared. Meles visited Washington DC this past week and met with State Dept and Congressional officials. His request was to postpone the HR 2003/2228 bills and that he would then release the CUD opposition leaders, otherwise it would possibly be no hope for them. So... Meles pretty much made an incompetent decision to turn what he deemed criminal offenders into political prisoners.

Where does it all stand? Not sure. The State Dept. has told the HR2003 sponsor to hold off on pushing the bill for a few weeks as to not risk harm to the CUD prisoners, but at the same time the bill's sponsors--Donald Payne, Tom Lantos, and now HR 2228's Chris Smith--aren't planning on compromising when the time does come to go before the house.

For now, I'll just hope it all works out for Mesfin Woldemariam and the others.

United States Social Forum 2007 - Atlanta

2007-06-28T19:52:00.001-04:00

The first US Social Forum is taking place this week in Atlanta. Over four days, there will be a combination of workshops, speakers, cultural events--concerts, poetry, etc--and lots of information distribution. Additionally, the streets of downtown Atlanta will be cluttered with DIY fashion, punks, hippies, yuppies, liberals, gays, canadians, democrats, activists, smelly people, doves and other assortments of generally pissed-off Americans. Basically, the USSF is a reaction to a reaction. Global agenda setting summits like the World Economic Forum, the G8, etc. pose a serious problem to pretty much just about everybody... even if you don't realize it. Those venues are basically eight powerful men and their lackies setting policy and initiatives for the rest of us. So, the World Social Forum was established in the early 2000's and then subsequent regional social forums spawned as well. Finally, the world turned to the US and said "what the fuck are you doing?" So, the USSF was born and 3-years later it's taking place. There's supposed to be about 10,000-15,000 people in attendance this week.
Will it be the catalyst of social change that the forum's motto hopes it will inspire, "Another World is Possible, Another U.S. is Necessary"? So, we'll see. I'm realistically optimistic. I predict there will be about 10,000-15,000 new drops in the ginormous bucket of activism. If nothing else, I see enormous activist networking opportunities. It seemed like the one workshop I attended today about "corporate campaigns" served mostly as a gabfest for union-reps at the forum to let everyone know they were there. I can't imagine much dramatic difference amongst the breadth of the several hundred workshops over the three main days, but I would expect an appropriate variance in information, collaboration, discussion to take place accordingly. It really all depends on which organization is facilitating the workshop. I really want to go to the Pacifica Radio one since I've been a huge podcast whore lately, but I'm not really a radio-person myself so it seemed kinda futile.
But what is really necessary for the kind of change that the USSF is advocating? A huge-ass collective pitchfork. Maybe that will be the product of this week. But it probably won't. The US Social Forum is a large scale version of "preaching to the choir." Sorry. Until Joe Suburb and Molly Metro start voting differently, consuming less, divesting smarter, reading more, bullshitting none, and waking up to the reality of what is around the corner for the world... no dice. The majority of people are just too damn selfish and generally stupid about their decision making--myself included. For self-example, I just bought a book about the evolution of the brain (The Accidental Mind). Keyword is "bought". Sure it'll be interesting and there's plenty of neat, philosophical gems awaiting in the pages... but honestly I just wasted $20, a book's worth of tree, a cardboard box to ship it in, the plastic bubble-wrap thing that will be put in the box to protect the book, and a relative portion of oil to fuel the vehicle that was used to ship it. I could have prevented all that consumption by reading it fo free at the bookstore a block away from where I live. Poor decisions. Poor outcomes.

Grab thy pitchfork. Be a responsible member of your species. Tear it all down.

learn to learn

2007-04-12T17:29:00.000-04:00

Did you hate school growing up? Do you still hate school? Then something's wrong. I can definitely understand hating "the school" or "the teacher", but we have honestly failed ourselves to the point that school and learning are one in the same. No one should have contempt for learning. It's a life long process and in some ways it is the only thing truly fulfilling in life. I mean this abstractly... learning about essential skills/knowledge, of course... but also learning about other people, learning about the ones we love, learning about the issues that are important to us, learning about how it feels to jump out of a plane. Just the process of educating ourselves to whatever ends we seek.
There has never been a higher demand in America for multi-skilled workers. We are no longer a manufacturing economy, and we haven't been one for a while. And as typical service industry jobs are getting shipped out by the million, we are slowly running out of traditional job options. BUT there is a way out. There are numerous opportunities and resources that are available to educate ourselves on a wide variety of topics such as science, arts, history, technology, and practical skills. But we as a nation must take advantage of this.

Some of this seems like obvious globalization rhetoric and in someways it is, but there is a key factor that we are missing. The educational process before you get to higher education. Remember that feeling when you figured out a complicated math technique or succesfully finished a project that you were proud of? That should be how every moment of education is. This is why we can no longer rely on memorization and rote skills forced upon student after student. We obviously need these skills, but it is not difficult to pick them up on your own. Honestly, how many things were really "taught" to you when you were in any subject? Of course you needed examples and help, but the real learning process was in the homework, drills, and such when no one was there to help you. And if people were always there to help you, then you probably didn't learn it. As the head mentor for Georgia Tech's Center for Education and Integration of Science, Mathematics, and Computing, we have always told incoming mentors a few basic tips for success. The most important of the bunch was to not do the work for the student. Maybe show them a few examples, maybe correct their work once they have already tried to find the answer on their own, but NEVER do the work for them. That is what the unmotivated student who needs help wants you to do. But will you be sitting next to them on test day? Will you be standing next to them at their graduation reading the diploma to them so he/she doesn't have to? So, what do you do? Make sure they understand the fundamentals. And then show them where to find the answers by themself. If you were writing a research paper, you wouldn't write the paper for someone. But you might tell them a few legitimate websites, authors, or journals to check out. The same must be done with math, science, etc. If question 6 on a homework comes out of chapter 7, then have them go to that chapter in the book and look at the examples. If that doesn't help, then pick apart the problem itself and look at the respective material for it. Whether you actually figure the answer out or not, the process of looking for the information and challenging yourself to pick the problem apart was more important than the answer itself. And when it comes to liberal arts and social sciences, if you went through a similar process, I bet you'll learn two new interesting, unrelated things that won't even apply to the assignment. I don't know how many times I've caught myself wandering around wikipedia or other websites just because I got sidetracked or was looking for a particular thing. And this is not a waste of time. There is nothing pointless to learning. You are discovering new things, understanding the world better, and opening yourself up to new interests and opportunities.

So, I don't really have an answer for the educational system... but I do know that we need to let it go. It's just not cutting it anymore. Reinvigorate the process and make it fun, and then the hard work will come naturally from there. It's amazing what someone will do when they are inspired. And if someone still doesn't work hard. Then you can just let the protestant work ethic weed them out. So, no more countless hours of making students do worksheets, and no more study halls, and no more boring teaching methods. Save the worksheets for homework.

If we reinvigorate the learning process, then we will keep more kids in school and excited about going above and beyond. And when they get to that next level, they will make bette decisions because they have a wider range of knowledge to assist them. The future for America is not straight science majors or engineering professionals or artists. The future is scientists who make movies, and engineers who are active in politics, and art majors who write computer software. Reinvigorating the educational system will teach future generations to teach themselves. pitchfork to the DoE.

Let's get out now

2007-04-12T02:31:00.000-04:00

Seriously. It's over. We screwed up. Just leave Iraq now. Whether we leave tomorrow or next year or in ten years, the place is a contagion of discontent. Just let it go. The problem, as Bill Maher so elegantly put it is that "Bush has watched too many prison movies." It's the classic strategy of beating the pulp out of the random guy to prove you aren't worth messing with. Well, guess what? The random guy is handing it to us. And the symbolic bully Iran knows we're full of it too. Do you think they would have pulled the "hostage" thing a few years ago? No. But we've been fueling the anti-American feelings that characterize the Middle East. And we've been showing that we went in both guns blazing with little understanding of the environment. But we're not stuck.

The cold truth is that Bush messed up and now he refuses to let go. Only once he is out of office and the blame can fall on someone else will we disengage this catastrophe. How many wasted dollars that should be going to education will be spent? How many more human rights violations will we commit in our war on islam... uh, i mean terror? This whole thing is just ridiculous. If only we had a big oil-interest, defense-contractor, Texas-ego stabbing pitchfork right now.

And this argument that we'll lose face with the rest of the world? Well duh, but I'm pretty sure in 15 years when we have a completely uneducated, uncompetitive workforce, a population that was robbed of the proper skills and resources to maintain the glory of the past generations, there won't be much to argue over.

PITCHFORK 138

2007-04-11T00:30:00.000-04:00

Pitchfork? Just something we need consider grabbing sometimes when our lack of leadership in this country and world brings us to such mechanisms. I do not mean we need to lead a citizens' coup, but rather we need a revolution every four years. We should never have any President for more than one term. We should rarely consider any politician to serve more than one term. Power corrupts, so get rid of em. And, always remember to pick the lesser of two evils.
138? Yes, a Misfits homage obviously. But more importantly is the meaning behind their horror-punk nonsense. 138 was the number assigned to the human race in some sci-fi flic from yesteryear. Embrace 138. We are humans and we should act like it. We don't eat our own. We think rationally. And we have opposable thumbs. Let's at least pretend we deserve these amazing psuedo-fingers.