The Moth

Listening to The Moth Radio Hour on NPR. I never heard it before. I like it. Do you think they know that this is a secular version of Testimony Sunday?

"Some Snow In The Higher Elevations..."

We don't always get snow when the foliage is still bright.  It's a nice moment.  I wish I were a better photographer or editor, but the scenes themselves do a lot of the work for me.

A Raw Day

I heard indirectly about a man who did not recognise the phrase “raw weather.”  His wife wondered if it were regional dialect, as they come from different places.  Naturally, such questions still make their way to me, because I will care about the answer.

I find no evidence that this is strongly regional.  Places that do not have raw days – Santa Fe comes to mind – may have more people who have seldom or never heard the term, but I find examples of usage throughout the US and Canada.  I didn’t check the UK and Australia/NZ.  However, the SOED records raw, as of weather, chilly and damp; bleak.  16th C.  I'd go a little stronger than that, myself.  Perhaps that's a NH perspective.  That 16th C also suggests it's not going to be especially regional in the US.

It’s rather a sliding scale what constitutes raw weather then, isn’t it?  Not only does it vary by region, it varies throughout the year.  A raw day in October in NH might be considered an encouraging sign of spring in late February.  Part of the sense of rawness, in fact, depends on the weather being unseasonal, a bit unexpected.

Cold is involved of course, plus some wind and moisture.  Wind and rain just at the freezing point, too early in the season or lingering too late, would be classic rawness.  I suppose one could have cold and wind alone and still get away with the description, but that seeping in of unpleasantness, that invasion up the sleeves or down the neck despite adequate protective clothing must be present.  Blown snow would qualify, even if it had fallen earlier.  Greyness may not be absolutely necessary, yet…pretty close.  But a still day, even with slush or puddle seeping through the shoes, doesn’t quite get the name “raw.”

Two From Volokh

There is always much of interest at Volokh Conspiracy, though much of it isn't so gripping if you ain't a lawyer.  The first is PETA's attempt to have whales freed from Sea World under the XIII Amendment (no slavery). The comments include a mention that the amendment was likely drafted by whale-oil light, and a wonderful extension that notes if the orcas are persons, then so are the sea-creatures they killed, so orcas should be incarcerated, and Sea World is rather ideal for it.  Fun stuff.

The second is a bit more disconcerting.  A lefty blogger declares that if OWS doesn't "work" - not sure what he means by that, but it seems to be a pretty considerable restructuring of society - then perhaps mandatory participation in government-assigned social media groups would be beneficial.  The idea seems to be that making people interact with others unlike themselves in race and orientation to solve problems will create a better citizen and be good for us all. His commenters seem to think this is a fine idea, which is rather chilling that such an idea doesn't immediately set off warning bells.

I hardly need to point out to this audience the possible problems that might arise from this, but I thought a few words might be in order.  The word "mandatory" should always wake one up and cause one to examine the proposal with narrowed gaze.  Mandatory means, ultimately, once the refusal to pay increasing fines and contempt of court charges are taken into account, that we will put you in jail for not doing this. It's worth keeping in mind.  Government should make some things mandatory, but we should be clear about exactly what, and why.  Secondly, I think I sense the liberal fantasy of "if you would just be open minded and not be stupid and a bigot, you would come over to our POV" behind this idea.  The idea that being exposed to a diverse group would be good for us and make us better citizens ultimately rests on that.  That people could be exposed to diverse (read liberal) POV's, and know some minority citizens pretty well, yet not essentially agree with them seems not to occur to the writer.  The assumption seems quite strong that we who disagree just haven't really thought about it much.

I understand that type of bias because that is pretty much what I think of liberals.  But I try to guard against it, and make sure that I've got some specific evidence to put forward every time I make such a claim.  I might ultimately just be rationalising and deluding myself, but I at least make some attempt to find evidence.

Snow

Won't last, though.

When I Fall

I think this was the first popular song that troubled Ben.  The first he mentioned out loud, anyway, that he had read the lyrics and saw the import, and wondered why no one else seemed to be noticing.  I chose this version for that reason - the audience reaction doesn't fit the song sometimes, and you wonder. Don't they know?

President Whatever

I'm thinking I don't want anyone to be president.  They're too much trouble.  Vice-Presidents seem to be a comparatively minor annoyance.  Can we have three or four of those instead?

I'd promise to be polite to them and everything.

Rethinking Schizophrenia

I has already mentioned recently my great approval of including the peer-support model in schizophrenia treatment. Of course, this presumes some acknowledgement by the sufferer of some degree of symptomatology. Those with complete lack of insight, or anosognosia, will have trouble availing themselves of this resource. But it is gratifying to see some positive press for this in popular media. The Sunday NYT has Keris Myrick's story. She has found that a full schedule and challenging herself is better life treatment than low-pressure, ease-into-it jobs. She uses other coping mechanisms as well, including peer support. The video isn't that great, but the story is good.

The Neurodevelopmental Hypothesis would seem to be an opposite at first. That approach, focusing on early detection and treatment, carries more than a whiff of "once you've got symptoms, you're already screwed and it's too late" about it. But that's an inaccurate reading, a leaping to conclusions.

Sometimes antipsychotic medications do magic, and if you are lucky, the side-effects aren't too bad. But really, they are often limited in what they can do. Hence the more recent focus on prevention and managing symptoms.

99%

Since I'm not part of the 1%, I must be part of the 99%.  As such, does anyone think I would be welcomed by the 99% Declaration Working Groups for my state if I tried to enter the discussion?  I could be a real pill of course, and call them on it and encourage all sorts of people completely unsympathetic to their ideas to sign up to be part of the Working Group discussions.

Yet though this would indeed point up their logical error, it strikes me a juvenile tactic.

OWS

Let me start with a prejudice that caught me right from the start with OWS. It's this 99% thing. It may be only a PR mistake on their part, but I suspect it is actually an attitude problem that is revealing itself in this catch-phrase. I get the point that they are trying to make, that it is a very small group of people who are ripping off the decent Americans, who may have their differences but should be able to get together and just fix this. They don't want to be opposed to everyone, they just want to alert us to the real enemy, and lead us to a solution.

In political matters, I have three immediate associations with that. First, 99% is how much of the vote dictators get in sham elections. Even if they were elected semi-reasonably the first time around, as they remain in power, the number climbs to insane percentages. It is a clear sign that the opposition is being suppressed and the nation is crazy. Secondly, this world-view that says that everything would go along smoothly if it weren't for a few evil people (plus their dupes, who may be more numerous) is a mark of paranoid thinking. The tendency to think like this precedes the identification of who those conspirators are. Thirdly, in the bad old days of communism, leftist groups would claim to be speaking for, and to represent, ever-expanding circles of the rest of the population. They represented The People. And they believed it. Those people who disagreed were people who just didn't understand and needed things explained to them; then they were dupes and agents of the oppressors; finally, they were the oppressors, and needed to be dead. This happened repeatedly. I don't think that the typical OWS protestor is anything like this. But I do worry two things: there are people among them who do indeed think like this, who will say so right out loud; secondly, the gentle, innocent people really do believe that they represent the 99% in some ways. They are not halfway to violence, but they are more than halfway to accepting one of the key arguments of the violent people. Worrisome.

You may say that they really don't believe this, but well, that's what they say. We, the 99%... What are we supposed to think? If challenged, I'm sure they have enough reasonable people on board at present to allow that no, of course not, we don't really claim...it's just that the 1%...(list of unfair and bad things follows). Well, then - don't say 99% just because it sounds cool to you. Because my contention is that it sounds cool to you for some very bad reasons you haven't recognised yet.

I will politely at least allow that it is just a PR mistake, and the number of people for whom this reveals some unattractive motives is actually quite small.

The Commentary Proper

If you pick up a newspaper or a magazine, or catch the interviews on NPR, you will come away with the impression that the OWS protestors around the country are mostly nice, frustrated young people who can't find good enough jobs, have a lot of student loan debt, and feel that something has gone fundamentally wrong with America. They believe, in the main, that corporate America, corporatism, and/or corporations, are cheating the rest of us, getting rich despite the difficulties others have. They are sure - as many Americans of divergent political beliefs have said for years - that there are lots of millionaires who pay no taxes. They contrast this with the people who they know, who don't have enough.

If you read conservative news sites, you will see an emphasis on OWS protestors saying stupid things, engaging in criminal acts, attracting nutcases and undesirables, or other negatives. Both are true, and many other slants could also be true, in that they highlight real people who are actually on site. A lot of this is still inchoate at present.

In the mainstream op-eds, there is a lot of energy being put into two narratives: One, that some people are gaming the system, darn it, and a lot of 'em are corporate and Wall St types. Even though these young people may not have all the details right and are unrealistic and overidealistic, they are essentially right about that, and we should listen to them. Their hearts are in the right place, and they are willing to make sacrifices and state their opinions, and we should be glad; the second narrative is that OWS is a lot like the Tea Party, really. The evidence for this is usually that they are both popular movements with a lot of regular people in them, that they both think America has gone wrong, and they are both...er...well, they're both protests. Happening now.

Narrative One: Yes, I suppose if you think Down With Unfairness is the political POV that your people have a corner on, and the OWS protestors are against unfairness, then I can see why you would think that they've basically almost got it, and just need a little steering, and they'll be fine. This is essentially what Obama has said as well. In my view, that's essentially what American liberalism is anyway, so the MSM approval is hardly surprising. Conservatives get all bent out of shape claiming that Obama, or Democrats, or liberals are really socialists/communists, but I think that's overdrawn. We can't even make a good tough-minded socialist these days, but have all these milk-and-water versions running around. Where it turns nasty is the rather juvenile conclusion that if you disagree with them, you must therefore be in favor of unfairness.

Narrative Two: Yes, and a horse is like a fish, because they are both animals. And they have two eyes and a mouth. And you can eat some fish, and sometimes people have eaten horses. And sometimes horses go into the water. And hoof and fin both have an "f" in them. So they are pretty much the same thing, sure.

There is actually one very good connection, that both groups would come down strongly against what we would call Crony Capitalism. They might not define it quite the same way, and they might order the queue for who goes first to the public stocks somewhat, but that piece they would agree on. Other than that, I'm not seeing much similarity, and I have to wonder if the people claiming it are that unobservant, or if their is some deeper manipulation happening here.

An OWS supporter of my acquaintance sent me the link to this group, the 99% Declaration, which includes a lot of references to 99% Declaration Working Groups. I have no idea if these people are major players or just one more group in the mix, vying to have their voice heard above the noise. But I grant that this group is attempting to act reasonably, and come up with a program, invite others to discuss, work in the standard American tradition of debate and rhetoric. What they put forward is pretty much just the liberal wish list of the last forty years, but it's merely misguided, not insane. An example:

5. A Fair Tax Code. A complete reformation of the United States Tax Code to require ALL citizens to pay a fair share of a progressive, graduated income tax by eliminating loopholes, unfair tax breaks, exemptions and deductions, subsidies (e.g. oil, gas and farm) and ending all other methods of evading taxes. The current system of taxation favors the wealthiest Americans, many of whom pay fewer taxes to the United States Treasury than citizens who earn much less and pay a much higher percentage of income in taxes to the United States Treasury. We, like Warren Buffet, find this income tax disparity to be fundamentally unjust.

Do they mean this Warren Buffet? This Warren Buffet? Also, we have this generic "fairness" going again. They are sure it's all unfair somehow, and factoids will satisfy.

There are darker elements at work, worth noting. There's no indication the average earnest couple in a tent on Dewey Square approves of this, or offers any encouragement to it. What is known is that this gangster/threatening/criminal stuff happens and no one denounces it from inside. I say no one - that's unfair, there may be some I don't know about. No one gets up and says "That's enough, I'm leaving, that's not what I'm here for." Contrast this to Tea Party Rallies, where nutcases were actively discouraged or shunned. There were constant claims there were racists and dangerous folk underneath the respectable disguise, but evidence for this was elusive. Here at Occupy Boston we have evidence and no one cares. No trial, no defense, just a self-appointed Committee Of Revolutionary Justice punishing the offenders.

Bigger Than We Knew?

There seems a slew of female vocalists who seem Bonnie Raitt influenced these days. Not saying I object. I just find it surprising.

Frida Surprises

Hang on through this. She has clearly had training, and could have done comic opera quite well.

Pinker's Better Angels

Steve Sailer (sidebar) has a partial review, linking to a more extended version, of Pinker's The Better Angels Of Our Nature. An excerpt, which is exactly the sort of thing I find encouraging.

A few points: the topic of violence is gigantic and Pinker's book is remarkably thorough. So, don't assume that Pinker hasn't considered, at length, the various counter-arguments. My galley copy is festooned with my notes to myself in the margin like: "A-ha! P. is ignoring X. That undermines his whole argument." But then, 400 pages later, Pinker writes something like, "You have probably noticed that so far I haven't mentioned X, which might seem to undermine my whole argument. But, I have seven responses to X."

Four From Today

I have a more reflective post about Lost Nation, NH that I will post this weekend.  But there were some nice oddments along the way that deserve short comments.

A typical trailhead, if you are hiking in the Whites in the fall.  This is Mt. Starr King trail. Thomas Starr King was a New York UU minister who wrote glowingly about vacationing in the White Mountains.  Even then, those Yankees had an eye for whatever fed the tourist biz.  Not very different from corporate sponsorships of stadiums, is it?(See also, Presidential Range.)

We are supposedly past peak foliage now, but this looks pretty good.  You don't get the sunset luminosity with my poor photography, but perhaps you can fill it in yourself.  I find the foliage just after peak to be more attractive than the declared "peak," which was last weekend.  Fewer reds, but the yellows and oranges are more dominant.

Remember those roadside cabins I wrote about in the Old Route 28 series?  Twin Mountain, NH is chockablock full of 'em.  They are going away slowly.  This batch is for sale now, and who will buy?






This painting on plaster or stucco is the sort of thing I want on my chimney. I haven't remotely go the talent for that, though.

Independent Scotland

NPR had some discussion of Scottish secession tonight.  I'm sure it's a serious subject and all that, but my first thought was "Haven't they been saying this for 300 years?"



When the Scottish Parliament reopened 12 years ago, they opened with a folksong...

Okay, some Guinness and Hard Cider came out my nose when I heard that.  Really.  Protests should have folksongs.  I've always thought "The Times They Are A-Changing" would have been good for the Tea Party, though it's too late now.  But you don't open congress with This Land Is Your Land*.

I know they've got North Sea oil - hell, we own a piddling tens shares of some o' that. (Our company seems to keep finding more natural gas, not oil.  But that's nice too.) But Scotland is currently high welfare, high services, low paying back into the UK coffers.  That's a pattern that repeats across Europe.  Flemish and Walloons, Northern and Southern Italy, Western and Eastern Germany. It's not stable.

* I take that back. I want to see videos of Maxine Waters singing that.

Reunion Update

I spent more time with the people I went to elementary school with, and the people I went to summer camp and a six-week advanced studies program with, than the people I went to Manchester Central with.  Particularly with the two from Straw School, we spent almost no time talking about anything any of us had done since 1965. I don't even know the general outlines of their lives, only that they are both teachers.

We talked about the things that happened 1959-65, and what had happened to the people we knew.  I learned something of their lives then that I had not realised. We shared some tragic news, some humorous updates, and many "do you remember" stories.

There are very, very few people left in the world who have even a remote chance of recalling those events.  We clutch to them, as a reinforcement that they did really happen; that we do remember them at least approximately; that the person we were, that child we have not seen for 50 years who is ourselves really did exist.  I could have made him up, you see. We learn that even events that happened a few minutes ago have no touch-point, no reality save within our memory.  Perhaps, then, events 50 years ago have no reality at all, and we wander in a barely-populated universe. Joan Blajda and Barbara Letendre* remember a boy with my name, and associate him with me as strongly as I do myself.  They remember things about him that accord with my own story.  Perhaps I am real after all.

The connection with a circle of five friends from HS was almost an entirely separate experience.  Other faces came and went.  I tried to give each a little encouragement as they spent their six sentences on me before moving on.

*Ruth Hamilton was also there, but entirely quiet.  She was quiet then, too.  That adds to the reality, for it is not only the word-people who remember.  I am evidently not a mere construction of words who finally became real in the 1980's.

Stats Panic

In the new format, I can track the traffic to each post.  I was growing discouraged, as posts that have been up for a month are showing only 10 visitors, on average.  As I often come back to a post for corrections, and my wife reads them, and my two oldest sons (presumably), and my commenters, that would be...like, all ten.  The sort of numbers that make one ask "What do I think I am actually accomplishing here?"

I'm glad I clicked through to "stats," which says I had had 243 pageviews yesterday.  More than ten, for sure.  I couldn't figure the discrepancy, until it dawned on me that the lower number is the clicks through to the comments.  It's the number of people who have visited the post as a stand-alone.

You might want to read the commenters more.  Some pretty smart people come through here.

Further oddities:  my most-visited posts this week include several from 2, 3, 5 years ago.  Goethe's Three Questions; Did Steven Pinker Lie; Linear Vs Circular Time.  I can't imagine what the circumstances were that led people to those. 

Chicago Cubs

Maz quote.  Theo Epstein is going to the Cubs, who haven't won since the 17th Century.

Search words

One of the search terms that brought up my site last week was  ზურაბ წერეთელი

Yeah, I looked it up and see the connection.  Still pretty funny, though.  The script is Georgian, or more specifically, Kartvelian (which I used to get confused with Karelian and thought was one of those weird distant language relationships.)

Leaf-Hunting

Hey, we made The Onion! For those not from heah, Penacook is a real place.