(2:34 PM) | John Emerson:

Commissar Goldberg

Jonah Goldberg's book has no importance at all from a scholarly point of view, but the Jonah Goldberg phenomenon is extremely important. He's the most recent of a long string of Movement Republican mouthpieces who have gained places in the legit media, and he's put a few new tweaks into the formula. Unlike Coulter, Malkin, Limbaugh, Savage, and Beck, Goldberg speaks in a nice NPR voice and has a professorial manner, and while what he says is no more than cheap taunting, the way that he says it seems scholarly. So responding effectively to him will be tricky.

Conservatives hate liberal notions of tolerance, open-mindedness, and civility, and Goldberg is setting a trap: "OK, buddy, tolerate this!" If you argue civilly, he gains legitimacy, since his target readers are the ones who don't pay close attention and will score the debate as a draw. But if you lose your temper or ridicule him, Goldberg will smirk down at you from the moral high ground. This is an old game, and in my opinion it attacks (albeit dishonestly) one of liberalism's genuine weak spots.

Goldberg's book is also intended to inoculate Republicans against the charge of fascism -- "We're no worse than the Democrats" is the standard Republican response whenever they're caught behaving indefensibly. Goldberg doesn't really need to make his case: he just needs to plant a few doubts and give the Republican mouthpieces some new talking points. Even if his book is mostly rejected, there will be some residue, the way accusations tarnish reputations at the unconscious level even when presented from the beginning as false (e.g., "Obama has never been a Muslim and has never attended a Muslim school).

When a legit publication features someone like Kristol or Goldberg, a clear message is sent about what is expected and what is permissible. Movement Republican plants are turf markers, rather like the illiterate commissars holding high positions in Soviet universities or the thugs sent from national headquarters to oversee mobbed-up union locals. The media are free, all right, but they still have to give the Republicans a voice and a veto. The stupider the mouthpiece, the clearer the message -- it's not really possible to pretend that either one of these guys was hired for his talents. And everyone else in the organization will get the message about what the management wants.

What about the substance of Goldberg's book? Is there any? If you take the book seriously, you play into Goldberg's hands, but it's worth pointing out briefly that there's no there there. So:

Like fascists, American liberals are more populist and futurist than classical liberals and traditionalist conservatives, but so are Republicans. (The classical liberals and traditionalist conservatives are nostalgia items -- dead as a doornail.) Like fascists, American liberals are willing to intervene in the economy in a way that classical liberals weren't, but so are Republicans -- and like Republicans (but unlike liberals), fascists favored big business with their interventions. It is true that in the late Nineteenth Century and early Twentieth Century many left groups were racist, but in the contemporary U.S. the racists are Republicans (the paleoconservatives and the neo-Confederates). Some early Nazi leaders were closet homosexuals, but so are many contemporary Republican leaders. The Nazi SA used anti-capitalist rhetoric at first, but the SA leaders were all massacred in 1934 and the group lost its influence.

And so on. As far as authoritarianism, militarism, contempt for legality, xenophobia, and the cult of personality go, the Republican Party which Goldberg automatically supports is remarkably more fascistic than the Democrats or any liberal group, so Goldberg just obscures these issues.

There's really only one reason why the Republican Party cannot be called fascist yet, though it's a big one. The Republicans (so far) don't have a paramilitary branch using violence and illegal means to intimidate opponents. But multiply the anti-abortion terrorists by a few hundred, and they'll have that too. (And you have to wonder what the Blackwater paras will do once they're brought home).

Repeating falsehoods with a straight face is Jonah's job. He can do this with confidence because he knows that his Republican sponsors and his media employers will accept anything he says. He was hired as a Republican mouthpiece, and if the Republicans like what he's saying the media can't object. Goldberg can also be confident that with a very few exceptions (Jon Stewart, Keith Olbermann, and Paul Krugman) no one in the major media will ever call him out on his fraud.

I expect the rest of the media will disgrace themselves by treating him as a reasonable man making a reasonable argument, and that in itself should be enough to tell us what desperate shape our country is in.

| | Main Page

(12:00 AM) | Adam Kotsko:

Friday Afternoon Confessional: Negative Prehension

I confess that I have a perilously small amount of money in my bank account and that this state of affairs will persist until my student loan disbursal early next month. I confess that I am getting too used to being poor -- I don't often experience direct anxiety, but I do sometimes suffer from meta-anxiety about how unanxious I feel. I confess that the main problem in my life isn't so much that I don't have enough money on average, but that I am so often delayed in getting money. I confess that I think that the industry standard practices when it comes to paying freelancers are really unreasonable, but I tolerate it because freelancing seems to fit best with my desired lifestyle.

I confess that I'm enjoying the hermit lifestyle that exam prep requires. I confess that I'm perfectly content assuming that I will have nothing to do in the evenings and therefore planning my Netflix activities to fill the hours when I can no longer read but can't yet go to bed. I confess that I'm finally making concrete progress on remedying my lack of acquaintance with early modern philosophy. I confess that I will probably start feeling social within a few weeks and will be near the brink of despair during the several days between when I start feeling lonely and when I can get my social life moving again.

I confess that self-knowledge doesn't seem to lead to changes in my behavior. On the other hand, self-deception is amazingly effective.

I confess that I religiously check the CTA's bi-monthly slow-zone map. I confess that the super-high Orange Line crossover south of Roosevelt scares me.

I confess that I've fallen into the habit of waking up at 9:30 every day. I confess that I don't really know why this bothers me, but it does -- 8:30 seems like a much better time to get up.

| | Main Page

(Adam Kotsko has asserted the moral right to be identified as the author of this post.)

Thursday, January 17, 2008

(4:09 PM) | Adam Kotsko:

Doomsday Averted!

Just minutes ago, the Senate voted to pass the mass transit bill with Gov. Blagojevich's amendatory veto. The House passed the same measure earlier today.

As the afternoon passed, I became so worried about the issue that I was actually watching the Senate live feed -- so The Weblog may even have this story before the local papers. That's the level of service we provide here!

| | Main Page

(Adam Kotsko has asserted the moral right to be identified as the author of this post.)

(12:00 AM) | Adam Kotsko:

The Rosetta Stone

I occasionally use Rosetta Stone software as a language-learning aid. Even more than the help I get in French or German pronunciation, however, I appreciate the fact that it teaches me a new language in the same way that I learned my native tongue: namely, through a series of exercises involving various combinations of written text, voice recordings, and pictures or videos.

| | Main Page

(Adam Kotsko has asserted the moral right to be identified as the author of this post.)

Wednesday, January 16, 2008

(3:51 PM) | Adam Kotsko:

Data Mining Run Amok

In the mail today, I received a pre-approved offer for the Anne Geddes Platinum Visa Card. Apparently, some complex algorithm spit me out as someone who would enjoy having the creepiest credit card ever:

| | Main Page

(Adam Kotsko has asserted the moral right to be identified as the author of this post.)

(3:11 PM) | Adam Kotsko:

Mitt Romney

I have probably been unduly influenced by Yglesias on this matter, but I tend to think that Mitt Romney is the "least bad" Republican in the race. In fact, my faux-advocacy of Romney has lately been more passionate than my advocacy of any Democrat, now that Edwards seems to be in decline -- if I can't have Edwards, either Hillary or Obama will do.

The media's love affair with McCain obscures the fact that, as things stand, Romney is the most likely to get the nomination. The media has painted Michigan as Romney's last stand. Yet going into that primary, he already had a commanding lead in terms of delegates, because he had consistently come in at least second place. As long as he keeps that up and as long as no other individual starts sweeping first-place finishes, he'll easily win the nomination as everyone's second choice. Even in the near-term, this trend is incredibly obvious. Romney is very unlikely to win either South Carolina or Nevada, and so the media will likely declare his momentary surge over -- but he is in second in both states, and two different people are in first: Huckabee and Giuliani, respectively. So the whole thing is a net gain for Romney.

The problem with verifying my theory is that the extant polls are pretty old. And of course, to keep looking viable enough to come in second place consistently, he'd have to get first place at least every so often -- a tall order for such an obviously loathsome and fake person. But he's come this far!

The depressing thing here is that if I'm right, we're likely to face a contest between Hillary and Romney -- a triumph of nihilism if ever there was one. Hillary would likely beat him handily, but at the very least, we'd be guaranteed a pandering technocrat, which would be a refreshing change of pace after 8 years of a messianic bumbler backed by an evil genius.

| | Main Page

(Adam Kotsko has asserted the moral right to be identified as the author of this post.)

Tuesday, January 15, 2008

(11:13 AM) | bitchphd:

Tuesday Hatred: Hating Ben Wolfson

Good morning, all. Or afternoon, I guess, for you east coast freaks. Long time no hate. I come to you today because "fucking Ben Wolfson," as Mr. Kotsko calls him, "said he'd do the Hatred today" and yet--no hatred. So I told Kotsko that I'd write a hatred all about how I hate Ben Wolfson, which he (Kotsko, not Wolfson) agreed would be satisfactory.

So here is my hatred for the week of January 15. I hate Ben Wolfson for saying he'll hate, and then not hating. I hate Ben Wolfson for being indifferent to--nay, I suspect actually disagreeing with--how much I hate being the "crazy, irrational" poster over at Unfogged. (For an example, see this discussion, in which my willingness to entertain the idea that maybe a paraplegic sprinter should, actually, be allowed to run in the Olympics means that I'd "demand that the New York Philharmonic add an electric guitar section" just because I felt like it!! That's how irrational I am!!! I make demands and have the power of ruining the New York Philharmonic by forcing them to integrate those horrible modern instruments that the kids all listen to nowadays!! Or something like that.)

I hate Ben Wolfson because his current state of academic ennui might be sort of like my current state of everything ennui, and because ennui is hateful. I hate Ben Wolfson because he doesn't hate the same things I do. I hate Ben Wolfson because it is his fault, indirectly, that I don't have my Bad Ass travel cup, and I hate Ben Wolfson because he is going to ask me what the fuck I'm talking about and then deny that it's his fault. Which is the kind of totally hateful thing he does to me all the time. I hate Ben Wolfson because his name came up in a discussion with someone else the other day, and because the other person and I disagreed about whether or not his (Wolfson's, not the other person's) presence in the world was hateful (oddly, I was actually arguing that it wasn't, or at least that it should be ignored), and because there we were, arguing about Ben Wolfson. (Not really, but sort of, in a small way that's suitable for exaggeration just to fuel my hatred.)

I hate Ben Wolfson because he will no doubt be completely indifferent to the fact that I just got a completely irritating email from my kid's school's head teacher telling us that the kids are *not* going to be trying out for the district talent show tomorrow after all, because they're just going to submit a DVD instead--a change of plans that is hateful because it is coming at the last minute, after three fucking messages sent home about how Important it is to Be There Tomorrow for the Talent Show Tryouts!!! and because I just had a fight with my husband about how am I going to get myself and PK to the talent show tryouts tomorrow without the car?!? and because I had to explain to PK for half an hour the other day why the tryouts were important, why he couldn't just do whatever he wanted, and that it was going to be fun!! and now it turns out I was wasting my fucking time. I hate the fact that actually assemblys like that, where the family shows up, *are* fun for kids, and now the fucking thing is cancelled because the school's head teacher can't get his fucking act together. I hate knowing that Ben Wolfson thinks my petty mommy hatreds are boring, and that Ben Wolfson kind of thinks my kid is a spoiled brat, actually, even though he (Ben Wolfson, not my kid) has been a lot nicer about that since the last time I told him how much I hated it.

I hate the fact that Ben Wolfson flaked on writing the hatred so I had to. I hate the fact that I've actually sort of enjoyed writing this hatred, and that I owe that enjoyment to Ben Wolfson. The hateful bastard.

[Editor's note: Tuesday Love is now available.]

| | Main Page

(bitchphd has asserted the moral right to be identified as the author of this post.)

Monday, January 14, 2008

(8:00 PM) | Rob Breymaier:

Is Apple Overrated?

It seems I'm among the very few people in the world that think Apple computers are not better than pcs. And, so I'm going to throw some reasons why I think I'm right see if anyone agrees with me. I'm no computer expert, but I do use them a lot and can get into the background a bit. I've actually hand-cleaned a program out of a registry once. But, I do not know code.

1. I think the security claims of Apple are less a function of Apple's better architecture than they are of Apple's small market share. I would bet that hackers want to get the most bang for their programming buck and so they go after he pc world instead of Macs, whether just hobbyists or actual criminals.

2. I don't think Apple's interface is intuitive and grumble about its limits every time I use one. I especially hate Macs with only one button on the mouse or the touch pad. I know there's some way to make it function like two buttons if I rock it differently or use some secret tapping code, but why not just make two buttons. Isn't that, as supposedly is the essence of Apple, more intuitive and simpler.

3. I think Apple is a lot like Fox Sports in that everything is too animated. It seems like everything I do on an Apple has some extra graphic flourish or sound to let me know I just did that. A good example is whatever Macs people call that thing that should be the task bar. Why not just show me what I have open at the bottom of the screen? Why do I have to find the right spot for that to show up and then whirl it around to get the right program?

4. Am I the only one that doesn't like Apple's pull down menus? They're too big.

5. Apples are too expensive.

6. Apple doesn't have a scaled back version (like saw the Celeron for pcs).

7. I don't like itunes that much but I was too lazy too research a better combination of mp3 player and itunes-like software. itunes seems slow. We all know the .aac format sucks for fidelity (not that mp3 is much better). The radio player has a lot of stations that don't work. And, paying a buck a song is a rip off.

I think this is officially a shit and garbage post.

Labels: s and g

| | Main Page

(Rob Breymaier has asserted the moral right to be identified as the author of this post.)

(11:42 AM) | Adam Kotsko:

Predicting the Next Bubble

Many readers and writers of this blog share an addiction to reading about speculative finance and how it is destroying us all -- yet paradoxically, our only hope is another speculative bubble! Since we all know so much about this stuff, we should easily be able to predict the next bubble.

When I opened up an article in the latest Harper's, I mentally predicted that "alternative energy" would provide the next bubble, and the author turned out to agree, though he also added the possibility that "public-private infrastructure partnership" would contribute. On IM just now, Brad predicted that coal could be the next big thing, and looking into the future, I thought that privatized water might be a good candidate for the bubble-after-next. (By the way, does anyone remember the big flurry of articles in the mid- to late-90's about the pending water crisis? That was when I first started following such matters -- Harper's and Atlantic Monthly both had front-page articles on the subject the same month. Harper's was much less sanguine.)

Any other suggestions?

| | Main Page

(Adam Kotsko has asserted the moral right to be identified as the author of this post.)

Friday, January 11, 2008

(12:00 AM) | Adam Kotsko:

Friday Afternoon Confessional: Amid Fears

I confess that I'm having trouble getting into exam preparation mode. I confess that I need to start working on a dissertation proposal. I confess that I got the typeset proofs for the Zizek book this week and so need to do the index soon. I confess that I need to eat more vegetables, particularly greens. I confess that I need a haircut.

I confess that I sent an e-mail to someone through the online personals that made me seem like the absolute most boring person in the world. I confess that despite my internet addiction and despite the cultural associations surrounding aspiring academics, I am actually much better in face-to-face settings.

I confess that sometimes I just want to write, "Hi, we should meet -- we'd probably like each other," but don't think that would be very effective. You know how "busy" everyone is! They have to be discerning, even if the discernment process ends up being more or less random. I don't think that the hypothetical hipster makeover would help with this basic problem. I confess that actually dressing like a hipster would feel like wearing a Halloween costume -- which I hate to do.

I confess that on Thursday I mailed back a Netflix DVD without watching it. My goal in doing so was to get as many discs of The Wire as I could, as soon as possible. I confess that I woke up at 10:30 in the morning for reasons that are unclear to me, and knowing that the collection time for the nearest mailboxes is 10:00, I confess that I went directly to the post office specifically to expedite my Netflix viewing. I confess that I sometimes suspect them of purposely holding back on me due to my high volume, but I sincerely hope that they don't do it this time, so I can get two more discs of The Wire on Saturday.

| | Main Page

(Adam Kotsko has asserted the moral right to be identified as the author of this post.)

Thursday, January 10, 2008

(5:45 PM) | Adam Kotsko:

Governor Blagojevich Remains an Idiot

The Illinois House and Senate both passed the most sensible and sustainable transit funding solution today -- primarily consisting of a marginal sales tax increase -- after 24 hours of negotiations. This summer, Gov. Blagojevich was grand-standing about how he didn't want to raise taxes on "the hard-working people of Illinois," many of whom would be severely impeded from "working hard" if the threatened transit cuts occurred.

Today, instead of vetoing the bill outright, Blagojevich used an amendatory veto to demand that senior citizens ride public transit for free. Now the legislature has to reconsider the legislation next week. This requirement comes completely out of left field -- he has never mentioned it at any point in the extremely protracted negotiations over transit funding.

Is he trying to gain a talking point now that he backed down against his idiotic opposition to a minor tax increase? Does he realize that he can't veto the bill, but still want to feel "included" in the negotiation process? Or is it just a completely random idea that popped into his head? The world may never know. One thing I do know: the man is not fit to govern. He's almost like George W. Bush, except in Bush's case, there is at least some type of consistent ideology or agenda at work. Blagojevich appears to embrace no principles or goals whatsoever. He can't even do political opportunism right.

He lives in my neighborhood -- maybe I should go egg his house.

| | Main Page

(Adam Kotsko has asserted the moral right to be identified as the author of this post.)

Wednesday, January 09, 2008

(11:14 PM) | The Girl:

Geography

Kotsko and I battled in a geography duel, and, as expected, Kotsko won. What do you expect, I suppose? Kotsko fills his time with pleated pants, pubs and Zizek; whereas I fill my time with fancy dresses, PBR and many issues of Vanity Fair.

At any rate, if you're so inclined, I encourage you to take the Traveler IQ Challenge. Despite having traveled less extensively than me and despite not acing Geography 101 with a perfect score like I did, Monsieur Kotsko beat me, although I don't remember by how much. Perhaps he can remind you.

Post your scores here. Commence the geography battle!

Also, should I give Kotsko a makeover? I am certain I could make him into Wicker Park hipster fabulousness for all of $100 total. Do you want him to get laid by hotties more often? Weigh in now.

| | Main Page

(The Girl has asserted the moral right to be identified as the author of this post.)

(12:51 PM) | Adam Kotsko:

Following the Elections

What percentage of press coverage and everyday conversation about the election process is based in actual knowledge, as opposed to empty speculation ("X is more electable!") or vague rhetoric ("Change!" "I'm the true conservative in the race!")?

This calculation is more difficult than it might initially appear. For instance, actual poll numbers may seem to constitute knowledge, but the opinions of those polled are themselves formed primarily based on empty speculation and vague rhetoric, as well as their perceptions of trends in previous polls (themselves based on empty speculation, vague rhetoric, and previous polls, ad infinitum). Under such circumstances, arriving at a core of actual knowledge begins to seem almost impossible.

| | Main Page

(Adam Kotsko has asserted the moral right to be identified as the author of this post.)

Tuesday, January 08, 2008

(12:00 AM) | Adam Kotsko:

Tuesday Hatred: Sleeping Life

I hate waking up at 4:00 am. I have done so on a fairly regular basis for the past week, as readers of Valve comment threads can attest. I hate that I feel that posting comments is an appropriate way to respond to sleeplessness.

I hate the recurring dream I've been having. Around this time last year, I went out on a few dates with a woman I met through online personals. We really hit it off, but she was going through a major shift in her career and I eventually decided to back off and let her decide whether to call me again. She did not, which in my waking life I thought was fine. Apparently my unconscious mind does not think it was fine, however, because within the past two weeks, I've had three or four really long and vivid dreams about her. Most of the time, she goes on a tirade against me for fucking up so badly: I didn't realize what I had, she would've been the one, why wasn't I more aggressive, etc. In one dream, I tried to reason with her. I'd messed up back then, yes, but surely we could start over? I was met with nothing but derision.

Anyway, [name redacted], if you're reading this, I'm sorry I fucked up so badly. Now please stop tormenting me in my sleep!

I hate how stressed out I allow myself to become when working on freelance projects at home. Actually, that applies to a lot of things, chief among them being computer problems. I hate that I can neither afford nor really justify buying a new laptop. The old Kotsko-bot is going strong -- it just needs to be rebooted if I open and close too many programs. Opening Windows Media Player in particular cripples it until the next reboot, for reasons that are unclear to me.

I hate that my Netflix passion is plummeting. The first disc of the first season of The Wire is in the house (on Mike's account -- between us, we can have a hard-hitting five DVDs at any given time), and it'd better be as life-changingly awesome as everyone says it is, or else I'm in danger of becoming a New Yorker-style Netflix subscriber. I suppose I do have several seasons of Curb Your Enthusiasm that I haven't seen yet, though.

I hate leaky garbage bags.

| | Main Page

(Adam Kotsko has asserted the moral right to be identified as the author of this post.)

Monday, January 07, 2008

(5:16 PM) | Rob Breymaier:

take your blimp and shove it

As I was listening to the Republican debate on NPR last night (a delightful round of entertainment), Ron Paul provided a prototypically infuriating libertarian argument as follows:

Inflation is a problem and we need to go back to the Gold Standard to fix it. Let me prove it to you. Oil has increased [whatever he said]% in dollars and [whatever he said]% in euros, but it has remained constant in its price against gold.

The infuriation is not just because Paul is misleading viewers/listeners. The infuriation comes from Paul expecting that no one will consider the logic of his example (and not even uber-turnaround artist Mitt Romney challenged him). His example is misleading because oil and gold are both traded in dollars. Therefore, any inflationary effect on the dollar (which the euro is also traded against) would be removed in a ratio of oil to gold.

In my experience, this is the sort of phony nonsense that libertarians love to spout off. There is often a variable left out or a logical step omitted that makes their arguments seem sound in quick conversation (in the short run?) and obviously erroneous after thoughtful deliberation.

| | Main Page

(Rob Breymaier has asserted the moral right to be identified as the author of this post.)

Sunday, January 06, 2008

(7:42 PM) | Adam Kotsko:

Pleated Pants

Why do I own so many pairs thereof? Why is there a style of pants that, by its very nature, seems not to fit properly?

I am presently going through my closet, throwing out most of the last remnants of the midwestern "you'll grow into it" chic. I believe that I am well past my final growth spurt -- though I must admit that the technique works up to a certain point: some stuff that I got in high school now finally fits. Suit jackets in particular seem to have held up well. Those who know me in real life will be shocked to learn that I own four.

But anyway, I'm getting some strong messages that pleated pants are awful, but I'd feel strangely vulnerable, getting rid of all but one of my pairs of dress pants. (Although the remaining pair is remarkable -- they never fail to elicit compliments, and I got them for $5.)

This post may represent the beginning of my long-delayed "fashion awakening." The Paypal link is available for those who want to participate.

| | Main Page

(Adam Kotsko has asserted the moral right to be identified as the author of this post.)

(10:32 AM) | Adam Kotsko:

Catholic Guilt vs. Evangelical Shame: A Thought-Experiment

As an adult convert to Catholicism, I never fully experienced the infamous "Catholic guilt" that affects those raised in the bosom of Rome. If one were to try to define Catholic guilt, it seems to me that it would have to be an exaggerated dutifulness that does not allow one to enjoy ill-gotten gains -- that is, Catholic guilt spoils all your fun.

Many might initially think that evangelicals also experience guilt in much the same way, such that the Catholic Church's reputation for uniquely skillful guilt-cultivation is undeserved. In my experience, however, evangelicals do not normally experience guilt, but rather shame. Unlike guilt, shame carries a libidinal charge that in a certain way enhances one's fun, generating the thrill of transgression.

| | Main Page

(Adam Kotsko has asserted the moral right to be identified as the author of this post.)

Saturday, January 05, 2008

(7:51 PM) | Adam Kotsko:

Timeliness

On the New York Times website, the blurb for the Sunday book review section says, "Since 9/11, publishers have been rushing to fill the knowledge gap on Islam."

| | Main Page

(Adam Kotsko has asserted the moral right to be identified as the author of this post.)

(10:38 AM) | Adam Kotsko:

For Completists Only

Last night, I watched the Short Films of David Lynch collection, and wow: it was virtually unwatchable. Lynch's own introductions to the films were interminable and awkward, and the quality of the films themselves was wildly uneven. "The Alphabet" (embedded below) was the only one that I found to be positively good -- he certainly deserved to get a film grant on the strength of it. The film that he made with the grant ("The Grandmother"), however, did not seem to me to be very good, and "The Cowboy and the Frenchman" was absolute shit. So I recommend that you just watch the movie below and leave it at that.

| | Main Page

(Adam Kotsko has asserted the moral right to be identified as the author of this post.)

Friday, January 04, 2008

(6:00 AM) | Adam Kotsko:

Friday Afternoon Confessional: Three Times One Minus One

I confess that my minor resolution met with limited -- but real -- success over the last two days. I confess that it was more difficult to sustain when I was doing some freelance work that required continual use of the computer.

I confess that Google's "street view" feature frightens me, though it can be useful.

I confess that I did not eat enough fruits and vegetables over the holiday season.

I confess that I have a man-crush on David Cross. I confess that season 2 of Mr. Show does not seem to be nearly as good as season 1.

| | Main Page

(Adam Kotsko has asserted the moral right to be identified as the author of this post.)

Thursday, January 03, 2008

(11:00 PM) | Adam Kotsko:

Fred Thompson

Who could've predicted Fred Thompson's strong showing today in Iowa? Only a few days ago, he claimed that he didn't give a fuck about running for president, and now all of a sudden he's in the top three!

The reason this happened is clear: USA ran a 32-hour Law and Order marathon over New Year's. Particularly in a boring state such as Iowa, this was bound to have an impact. He'd better be praying for another major Law and Order push before New Hampshire.

| | Main Page

(Adam Kotsko has asserted the moral right to be identified as the author of this post.)

Wednesday, January 02, 2008

(5:09 PM) | Brad:

America's Consumptive Cough

I've long had a problem with those misguided souls who go on about the world's "overpopulation problem." Mostly, this is a not-so-subtle way of saying that poor people really should stop breeding. Even more misanthropic critics will say, behind closed doors, after a few drinks, that AIDS will sort things out in Africa. Most would cringe at this sentiment, and rightly so, but they would likely not have a solution beyond a mixture of more education and/or liberalization of the Third World. If only we could teach them to become like us!

Unfortunately, the reality on the ground doesn't support this general assumption. In fact, if anything, the reality on the ground exposes the outright flaws both in the assumption and the perspective that came up with it in the first place. First, the assumption that everybody should be like us; and second, the self-perception that our way of life is the prize everybody's eyes should be on.

The fact is, the American dream isn't even a nightmare. No, there's too much that is tangible to it even to sustain that particular metaphor. It is, rather, a bordello fantasy straight out of Ben Franklin's Parisian nightlife. Ah, but here's the thing -- we're convinced that a) the role-play is real, and that the jizz jar bent before us / rancid piece of pulled pork dangling over us really speak in love when they say, "You fuck me better than the rest," and b) that those pox marks on our genitals will heal themselves (and if not, why not, spread the love!). Our national myth of prosperity is a role-play that never stops. We will, we're assured, figure out ways for it to continue -- be it, blindfolds, Viagra, novelty costumes, clowns, ponies and and rubber balls. Oh, and yes, extending the invitation that others can play along!

So, we present the Third World with the Third Way, an illusion of our own illusion, that is, the means to consume as much as we do, if they but embrace democracy and its open markets, and then snicker mightily at the tragedy that the Earth cannot even sustain our own present levels of consumption. To embrace our illusion, and even to openly propogate it, is one thing; but to believe in it is another thing entirely. Such is the damnable offense of religion and marriage and education and liberalism, etc.

So, you're right, Jared Diamond. No, the problem isn't them. The problem isn't the real sex and overpopulation of others -- as patriarchal and problematic as their sex often is. The problem is our wet dream turned real: an erection that never stops at an orgy that never ends. The American way of life, at its finest.

| | Main Page

(Brad has asserted the moral right to be identified as the author of this post.)

(9:44 AM) | Adam Kotsko:

A Minor New Year's Resolution

When I first started using Google Reader, I thought it would reduce the amount of time I spend "keeping up" on things. In principle, it can be that, but in practice, it became yet another thing for me to hover over and "check," joining the essential task of endlessly clicking the refresh button on Gmail and Haloscan.

Be it resolved, therefore, that I will henceforth exclude Google Reader from my routine internet checks and limit its use to particular times (beginning with breakfast). To symbolize this resolution, I have removed the Google Reader tab from my standard browser setup, leaving only Gmail and Haloscan comments.

With any luck, this resolution will last until this afternoon.

| | Main Page

(Adam Kotsko has asserted the moral right to be identified as the author of this post.)

Tuesday, January 01, 2008

(1:19 PM) | Adam Kotsko:

Tuesday Hatred: All the Way from Japan

In lieu of Tuesday Hatred today, I am going to tell you the story of my New Year's Eve festivities. Comments are open for any and all hatred.

Last night, I went with a friend from the U of C to the Checkboard Lounge, a blues club in Hyde Park. I was expecting it to be a relatively empty dive bar, and so the entire night was a surprise to me. The format of the night was for the backup band to remain steady, while various band leaders took their turn. The opening band leader was an old man who seemed to be drunk, senile, nervous, or some combination thereof, and who simply pointed at the players when it was their turn to do a solo -- once he accidentally pointed at the bass player, who began to play a solo before being cut off abruptly. It was the only bass solo that would be heard that evening, which was also free of any drum breaks.

The old guy made pretty much everyone feel nervous -- I was surely not the only one wondering what the protocol was if a performer dies on stage. But my attention was somewhat diverted by the fact that the band's saxophone player was a young Asian woman. Her solos were all really good, at least to my nonexpert ear, and I at first reasoned that she must be a U of C student who had somehow gotten involved with the club. When the second band leader came up, however, it became clear that no one really knew where she came from. He introduced the soloists by name, except for the saxophone player: "And all the way from Japan... um... the saxophone player! I don't really know her name, but she's one bad mamma-jamma." She then played the solo with aplomb. The headliner, Vance "Guitar" Kelly, also referred to her as merely the saxophone player "all the way from Japan," and over the course of the evening, it became clear that she barely knew English.

Vance "Guitar" Kelly was by far the best among the band leaders. When he first came up, he was wearing a coat and scarf -- which he kept on for the entire night -- so I thought he might be a bouncer making an announcement, but he strapped on the guitar and started playing "Members Only." After an awesome Jimi Hendrix cover, he temporarily handed the reins over to his daughter and her husband -- "all the way from Switzerland" -- who also happened to be a blues guitarist. The daughter was very enthusiastic, though it started to seem like the only song she knew was "Rollin' Down the River," which she sang in two different versions.

Her real passion appeared to be shaking her ass, and at a certain point she decided to do an audience participation portion, where she would teach others her unique dancing style. Despite my protestations, I was chosen as a part of this group, which drew disproportionately from the handful of repressed white people in the club. I was standing next to her for the first lesson, and though I gave it an honest try, looking down at her ass I realized that I simply did not have the muscles required to make anything close to that happen.

Thankfully, a non-repressed white guy quickly took center stage, attempting to outdo the daughter. I gladly stepped aside. The final stage of the audience participation was for us to freeform, or as she put it, "do what you want." I considered sitting down in the nearest chair, but calculated that that would only bring further attention to me. When I was mercifully released, a guy from the next table over -- who incidentally spent much of the evening doing a dance that primarily involved hopping around in circles in his chair -- gave me the thumbs up. I disagreed.

At around 11:15, a meal was served -- a heaping plate of soul food, for which we had to stand in line. I found the late-night meal strange, but it did seem to be a good way of preventing hangover. They distributed glasses of champagne (my friend, who had gone to the Checkerboard for New Year's the previous two years, said they used to give out whole bottles) just in time for the countdown. We left after Vance "Guitar" Kelly's next set.

This post seemed more interesting when I was composing it on the train.

| | Main Page

(Adam Kotsko has asserted the moral right to be identified as the author of this post.)