Three Cheers for Tax Day? Not With This EPA
Noam Chomsky thinks our attitude about tax day is analogous to our attitude about our democracy; if we had a democracy that was in any way representative of what the general population wanted, then tax day would be celebratory, a day where we knew we were funding programs and activities that we generally agreed were going to make our country a better place-- but instead it is a "day of mourning" when an "alien power" steals your hard-earned money and uses it to further the interests of richest constituency; one of my favorite podcasts, The Indicator, falls right in line with this attitude . . . and I share this general anger-- I don't think we need to increase military spending and build more nuclear warheads-- and, like the vast majority of Americans (74%) I think the country should "do whatever it takes" to protect the environment, but the EPA, an agency that protects all Americans with its policies-- rich, poor, middle class-- is being dismantled and defunded; I know I sound like General Ripper in Dr. Strangelove, but this is the only air and water w ehave, and I don't want my precious bodily fluids polluted (I also don't want to start a shooting war, so I'm not exactly like General Ripper) and if you want to get angry about where are tax dollars are not going, then listen to this episode of The Daily . . . Scott Pruitt and Trump are doing their best to aggressively roll back emissions standards (so much so that even the automakers are worried because it may make them need to make different, cleaner cars for California, which has strict emissions standards . . . even though, ironically, it was automakers that wanted less regulation on emissions and lobbied this administration to do so, despite the fact that we bailed the automakers out with our tax dollars and so own these industries as a country but have no say in how they proceed) and so you've got a real lack of democracy-- the majority of the people want clean air, but a small minority (businesses that pollute) want less regulations and the ability to pollute with impunity, and our tax dollars are going to the latter, to enrich a tiny segment while the externalities affect the masses . . . all you can do is vote for taxes on gas (hooray New Jersey!) and push for state emissions legislation like California, while we wait out this absurd EPA agenda (and plant trees).
The Birds and the Trees
I forgot to put up yesterday's post, which details all the tools I used to plant an apple tree in my front yard (I had to remove a weeping cherry first) and-- because of the monsoon-like rainstorm today-- I was a bit nervous at school that I would arrive home to find my tree floating in a neighbor's yard, but apparently I did a good job with my hole and my soil and my mulching, and the tree was still standing straight and tall; I did a little research and learned that I need to plant another apple tree in my front yard (I've got a spot picked out) and it will cross-pollinate with my Braeburn tree-- Fuji or Gala or Honeycrisp are compatible cross-pollinators, I went on some sort of Match.com for apple trees site-- and then under the cover of night, the trees will pull their roots from the ground and slowly walk towards each other and engage in sexual intercourse . . . with any luck, I should be eating front-yard apples in three or four years: I will keep you posted.
Game of Tools
I used five different tools for my gardening projects this weekend-- five!-- I wanted to remove an anemic weeping cherry tree from the ground and plant something new, and I wanted to transplant a fargesia clumping bamboo plant from one spot to another . . . here is my list of tools:
1) hedge clippers on the weeping cherry (because I couldn't get close enough to the tree to dig around it, so I had to clip off all the branches)
2) a pick-ax (to try to break up the soil and roots around the tree)
3) three different shovels . . . because I broke two of them trying to pry the bamboo plant out of the ground;
4) an ax . . . I couldn't cut through the weeping cherry roots with a shovel blade;
5) and the fifth tool, of course, is me!
1) hedge clippers on the weeping cherry (because I couldn't get close enough to the tree to dig around it, so I had to clip off all the branches)
2) a pick-ax (to try to break up the soil and roots around the tree)
3) three different shovels . . . because I broke two of them trying to pry the bamboo plant out of the ground;
4) an ax . . . I couldn't cut through the weeping cherry roots with a shovel blade;
5) and the fifth tool, of course, is me!
The Test 108: Game of Names
This week on The Test, Stacey begins with some crystal clear instructions on how to play her name-game- mash-up, but Cunningham and I don't really follow . . . until (ever so slowly) we figure it out; ultimately, in a brilliant reversal, I hijack the test . . . odd puppet!
Let's Continue What Henry Ford Started
Is there anyone who still thinks working five days in a row is a good idea?
Dave is Foiled Again (by Computers and a Woman)
At our school, we have a number of chromebook carts-- they are incredibly cumbersome and heavy computer carts that house and charge 30 chromebooks-- and the etiquette is that the last person to have the cart needs to make sure all the chromebooks are in their proper slots and plugged in; this is a nightmare because high school students are animals, they just chuck them in any slot-- even if there's already a chromebook residing there-- and they rarely plug them in (and some teachers are vigilant about making the students sign out a particular chromebook and then monitoring that number, but I'm too lazy to deal with that kind of clerical work, so I just end up calling my students uncivilized animals and then I deal with the aftermath . . . in some ways it's easier and more fun than being vigilant) and almost all of the chromebook carts have been impressed into service for PARCC testing but I still have my special cart for the College Writing class, and my friend and colleague Stacey asked to borrow the cart this afternoon and I graciously agreed to bring it up to her room once my Creative Writing class was finished with the chromebooks; my students did their typical crappy job putting the chromebooks back in the cart, but I figured it didn't matter because I was bringing the cart up to Stacey and her students would have to get it organized at the end of the day; I was very proud of this clever ruse but at the end of period 10, when one of Stacey's students brought the cart back to my room, it was a total mess-- chromebooks unplugged, a couple of slots left empty, a couple of slots doubled up, cords all over the place . . . so I publicly shamed Stacey on a group text we had going and said she was "so rude" for not following the chromebook cart etiquette . . . but she retaliated by saying she ended up not using the chromebooks and simply returned the cart in the same state as when I had brought it to her . . . so in a cunning reversal, I ended up publicly shaming myself . . . but I still wonder about this case, which was a bit like a game of hot potato . . . because while she didn't technically use the chromebooks, the cart was in her possession last; I think this is one of those situations where the letter of the law and the spirit of the law don't quite jibe (and I'm pretty sure everyone else in the department is on Stacey's side in this instance, especially because I had malicious intent).
Juxtapostion That Foreshadows Something Bad
The literary term "juxtaposition" is a favorite of sophomores the world over, mainly because it applies to nearly any two things placed side-by-side that elicit some sort of irony or contrast . . . it's easy to identify, sounds smart, and-- along with foreshadowing-- it's the most popular term thrown about by wannabe high school literary scholars . . . but sometimes things are hackneyed and cliche for good reason, and a really excellent ironic juxtaposition is a wonderful thing: my wife and I are watching Breaking Bad with the kids and we finally got to season 5 and my two favorite episodes: "Dead Freight" and "Buyout"; during "Dead Freight," Walter, Mike, Pinkman and Todd engineer a methylamine train heist-- a heist that will occur unbeknowst to the train conductor-- and despite a few hiccups and a lot of stressful moments, they pull it off with great success-- until the last moments of the episode, when the gang pays a very heavy price for their actions . . . the next episode deals with the aftermath, and features the greatest dinner scene in TV history, the first time that Pinkman, Skyler and Walt really sit down together and interact-- the tension is so unbearable it's funny-- Pinkman tries to make small talk in an absolutely untenable situation . . . even if you've never seen Breaking Bad and don't want to commit to five seasons, you can watch these two episodes as a stand-alone unit, they are magical, awkward, and capture everything great about the show.
I Have to Stop Yelling at Republicans
At the high school, English teachers tend to be liberal and history teachers tend to be Republicans-- and once in a while a history teacher will come up to the English Office to take our pulse on the current political situation and I always end up ranting and raving about voodoo economics and Republican induced financial meltdowns and deficits and unprecedented spending and tax cuts for the Constituency and all that and today was one of those days and this time we got on the topic of is Trump behaving like a banana-republic dictator and everyone entrenched themselves-- the history teachers have the perspective that Trump isn't nearly as bad as people (liberals) thought it would be and he's really getting some great stuff done and the English teachers-- myself included-- think we're living under the regime of a madman, who likes to flaunt his nuclear capabilities, is https://player.fm/series/voxs-the-weeds/the-imprudent-scott-pruitt-- looking for ways to add lead in our environment, pollutants to our lakes streams, CO2 to our atmosphere, coal dust to our lungs and racing us to the precipice in regards to climate change-- and that our commander-in-chief changes his opinion in regards to his staff and policy daily . . . if you want more ammunition for the latter perspective, listen to the new episode of This American Life . . . it's the story of how Republican Senator Jeff Flake tries to get a popular DACA bill passed in an absolutely insane White House, or you could listen to the folks on The Weeds explain how Sinclair broadcasting is forcing local newscasters to spout right wing propaganda . . . the problem with this stuff is it's relatively boring, like Trump and Pruitt's attempt to repeal the Clean Water Act, but it's happening and obviously some folks either are unaware of it or think this is the stuff that makes America great, and some folks-- myself included-- are angry and annoyed; I remember feeling this way during the Bush administration too-- he was another enemy to the existential environmental threats that our species is facing-- but at least he was more of a bumbling knob, as opposed to our current windbag of Presidential flatulence.
O Lord, Dad Needs a Dog
I've been through the valley of the shadow of death and all I can say is that it was no fun-- but I'm starting to get over the loss of our family dog Sirius (and if anyone else is grieving over the loss of a pet, this movie will be more helpful than this awful poem . . . I can see why the author would want to remain anonymous) and I'm starting to recognize that I need a new loyal canine companion, so I don't drive my family batshit; case in point, when we were on vacation in Vermont last week, after we had gotten home from lunch-- which was a twenty minute car ride-- I unilaterally encouraged my family to take a constitutional stroll up the road to the waterfall, and I met some resistance from my two sons, but I told them this wasn't a choice-- everyone in the family was going for a walk and-- more important-- they were going to like it . . . Catherine gave me a look that said, "You are insane," but-- and I really respect her for this-- she didn't undermine my plan and she told the kids to listen to their father and get walking and then I reminded the little ingrates that taking a walk with the family was not a punishment and they'd better not refer to it as such and they should take pride and joy in the fact that they had ambulatory parents that could still hike up a mountain road and they were lucky we weren't crippled and in an old age home and then we took our walk-- Alex came around and enjoyed himself, but Ian shuffled sullenly sixty yards behind us the entire way (and never got to see the waterfall) and the consensus after this forced march was: Dad needs a dog . . . so we are browsing the rescue sites and maybe soon enough I'll have someone in the house that appreciates a communal stroll or a quick bike ride around the park, someone who doesn't mind going for a short car ride to run an errand, someone loyal and happy who might be a pain-in-the-ass to take care of but will earn it back with good attitude (we're thinking maybe a German shorthaired pointer . . . I don't want a dog that looks like Sirius because that would freak me out).
Some Chomsky to Chew On
I haven't read a Noam Chomsky book since we lived in Syria but I stumbled on a new one at the library and finished it in three days; Global Discontents: Conversations on the Rising Threats to Democracy is a fast read, though profoundly disturbing, and Chomsky hammers home his usual points with detail and precision;
1) America is a rogue state that has used its hegemonic military power to break countries and then does nothing to help fix them-- we don't take in the refugees caused by our policy; we continue sanctions and military occupations willy-nilly, without regard for the citizens of the countries we ruin; we support evil regimes in places like Saudi Arabia and Turkey and (once upon a time) in Iraq and Central America; we harbor ancient grievances against some countries, like Iran and Cuba; we use drones, proxy wars, arms-dealing, and oil to influence the neoliberal market driven power structures;
2) the book is oddly prescient about a couple of current events; Chomsky could have been writing about the migrant caravan that Donald Trump is so worried about when he said, "when people flee from Central America-- from the three countries that were devastated by Reagan atrocities-- El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras-- we expect Mexico to stop them from reaching our borders . . . that's their job" and he delineates the terrible problems in Syria and Lebanon-- fabricated countries drawn up by Western forces after WWI-- which could only lead to atrocities like the recent chemical attacks in Douma;
3) Chomsky doesn't give Obama or Bill Clinton a pass-- they are both part of the problem, both expanding state power for the neoliberal agenda; Obama increased drone attacks and continued to build our nuclear arsenal and Clinton worshipped the market and knew how to keep the rabble in line;
4) but the Republicans are much much worse . . . while attention is focused on the latest Trump tweets and his "latest mad doings, the Ryan gang and the executive branch are ramming through legislation and orders that undermine worker's rights, cripple consumer protections, and severely harm rural communities . . . they seek to devastate health programs, revoking taxes that pay for them in order to enrich their Constituency, and to eviscerate the Dodd-Frank Act which imposed some much-needed constraints on the predatory financial system that grew during the neoliberal period"
5) if you're getting used to the Sam Harris type liberals, who are logical but still very entrenched in the neoliberal techno-optimist dream, you need to read some Chomsky and refresh yourself with radical left ideas-- Chomsky is an anarcho-syndicalist and he thinks every power structure-- including our national government-- should be examined and probably dismantled; he sees the worship of the state and capitalist markets as far more dangerous than religion, and he believes the only power worth exploring and supporting is that of the community, small groups, activism, workers running and owning factories, communities under community control, institutions under direct control from galvanized voters that could enact immediate recall of their representatives, and this would lead to a fading of national boundaries-- as has started to happen in Europe-- and a global system based on mutual aid and support, with production for use rather than profit, and a concern for species survival;
6) while this is wild stuff, and I lean a little more towards a market-based economy with more incentives and rules than we have now (especially some things to stop this no health-care/benefits gig economy in its tracks, before my own children have to participate in it) but Chomsky's big takeaway in this book is that we are not discussing the two most important things, the two things that should be the ONLY things on the agenda-- climate change/environmental destruction and increased militarization and nuclear arsenals . . . it's like those problems are so huge that we're just sticking our head in the sand . . . Trump pulled us from the Paris climate accord and he's happily racing us to the brink of disaster, lowering mileage standards, bringing back coal, and denying that any of this is a problem; Trump is also flaunting our military and nuclear power like it's something to be proud of, when it really does contribute to us behaving very badly around the world . . . so if you've got your head in the sand about our weird and wonderful country, it's worth reading a little Chomsky as a wake-up call . . . I'd love to have the time and tenacity to read all his sources, but that's not going to happen, and I probably won't read another Chomsky book for a while-- it's too depressing-- but I still recommend you read something he's written, just so you can see things from a totally fresh perspective . . . plus, his name is really fun to say: Chomsky . . . Chomsky . . . Chomsky.
1) America is a rogue state that has used its hegemonic military power to break countries and then does nothing to help fix them-- we don't take in the refugees caused by our policy; we continue sanctions and military occupations willy-nilly, without regard for the citizens of the countries we ruin; we support evil regimes in places like Saudi Arabia and Turkey and (once upon a time) in Iraq and Central America; we harbor ancient grievances against some countries, like Iran and Cuba; we use drones, proxy wars, arms-dealing, and oil to influence the neoliberal market driven power structures;
2) the book is oddly prescient about a couple of current events; Chomsky could have been writing about the migrant caravan that Donald Trump is so worried about when he said, "when people flee from Central America-- from the three countries that were devastated by Reagan atrocities-- El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras-- we expect Mexico to stop them from reaching our borders . . . that's their job" and he delineates the terrible problems in Syria and Lebanon-- fabricated countries drawn up by Western forces after WWI-- which could only lead to atrocities like the recent chemical attacks in Douma;
3) Chomsky doesn't give Obama or Bill Clinton a pass-- they are both part of the problem, both expanding state power for the neoliberal agenda; Obama increased drone attacks and continued to build our nuclear arsenal and Clinton worshipped the market and knew how to keep the rabble in line;
4) but the Republicans are much much worse . . . while attention is focused on the latest Trump tweets and his "latest mad doings, the Ryan gang and the executive branch are ramming through legislation and orders that undermine worker's rights, cripple consumer protections, and severely harm rural communities . . . they seek to devastate health programs, revoking taxes that pay for them in order to enrich their Constituency, and to eviscerate the Dodd-Frank Act which imposed some much-needed constraints on the predatory financial system that grew during the neoliberal period"
5) if you're getting used to the Sam Harris type liberals, who are logical but still very entrenched in the neoliberal techno-optimist dream, you need to read some Chomsky and refresh yourself with radical left ideas-- Chomsky is an anarcho-syndicalist and he thinks every power structure-- including our national government-- should be examined and probably dismantled; he sees the worship of the state and capitalist markets as far more dangerous than religion, and he believes the only power worth exploring and supporting is that of the community, small groups, activism, workers running and owning factories, communities under community control, institutions under direct control from galvanized voters that could enact immediate recall of their representatives, and this would lead to a fading of national boundaries-- as has started to happen in Europe-- and a global system based on mutual aid and support, with production for use rather than profit, and a concern for species survival;
6) while this is wild stuff, and I lean a little more towards a market-based economy with more incentives and rules than we have now (especially some things to stop this no health-care/benefits gig economy in its tracks, before my own children have to participate in it) but Chomsky's big takeaway in this book is that we are not discussing the two most important things, the two things that should be the ONLY things on the agenda-- climate change/environmental destruction and increased militarization and nuclear arsenals . . . it's like those problems are so huge that we're just sticking our head in the sand . . . Trump pulled us from the Paris climate accord and he's happily racing us to the brink of disaster, lowering mileage standards, bringing back coal, and denying that any of this is a problem; Trump is also flaunting our military and nuclear power like it's something to be proud of, when it really does contribute to us behaving very badly around the world . . . so if you've got your head in the sand about our weird and wonderful country, it's worth reading a little Chomsky as a wake-up call . . . I'd love to have the time and tenacity to read all his sources, but that's not going to happen, and I probably won't read another Chomsky book for a while-- it's too depressing-- but I still recommend you read something he's written, just so you can see things from a totally fresh perspective . . . plus, his name is really fun to say: Chomsky . . . Chomsky . . . Chomsky.
Scott Pruitt Wants to Bring Back Wilding
Trump's egregiously biased EPA appointee Scott Pruitt is determined to roll back as many regulations as possible-- and while some regulations certainly inhibit business, at times regulation is a good thing-- regulations can incentivize behavior that will help the country and the economy as a whole, and regulations can limit externalities that are paid for by society at large; the real cost of leaded gasoline was probably an unprecedented crime wave that culminated in the early '90's, when the young brains affected by lead-- a potent neurotoxin-- came of age . . . Reagan and his version of the EPA attempted to relax or even eliminate the lead phase-out, but apparently public outcry and Doonesbury came to the rescue . . . anyway, that's a lot to digest-- it's far more fun to read some Trump tweets and wonder why the President hates Amazon and loves Sinclair news-- but it's all happening again, Pruitt wants to roll back lead paint regulations-- why?-- and he wants to lower mileage standards for cars, because climate change is a hoax and the United States loves Saudi Arabia-- despite the terrorists and the religious rule and the civil rights abuses, they are compliant, sell us oil, and buy our weapons-- so we might as well make giants cars that guzzle up their gasoline . . . and this is an issue where you can make a difference as an individual: drive less, buy a smaller car, and keep an eye out on what's going on in your area, it seems Pruitt and his staff are doing a shoddy job and a lot of his anti-regulatory attempts are getting mired in court . . . anyway, beware of externalities, because with Trump and Pruitt in charge, the externalities are coming for you (and your children and your grandchildren).
Real News and Fake Vacations
I took this picture with my phone a couple days ago when we were at the top of Okemo Mountain-- it was snowing and the conditions were beautiful-- and then I pressed a button and my phone sent it over to my blog, and let's be honest, the reason I did all this hard work was to contribute to your depression, because your spring break probably wasn't as glamorous and awesome as my spring break and now you're going to see this picture and feel really bad . . . of course, you could strike back with an even better picture of even cuter kids in an even more glamorous locale and then I'd feel depressed and we could go back and forth like this ad nauseum until we started creating "fake vacations," which appears to be easy enough to do (if you've got photoshop skills).
Let's Get Political, Political . . . Let Me Hear Your Party Talk
Since the topic has generated some interesting commentary, here are some final thoughts on Jonathan Haidt's book The Righteous Mind: Why Good People are Divided by Politics and Religion:
1) while there are more than two kinds of people, our political system breaks us down that way-- unfortunately, there should be room for libertarians (who give even less of a shit about things than liberals do, but really care about liberty/oppression and have even less empathy than conservatives)
2) you can tell someone's political beliefs by the kind of dog breed they prefer: gentle and independent versus loyal, protective and wary of strangers;
3) Haidt admits that liberals go too far sometimes in their reflexive anti-business stance, and they could endorse the wonders of the free market to solve problems-- he makes a great analogy with food and the silliness of having food insurance, instead of knowing the prices for items and shopping around and buying what works, versus health insurance, where we have no clue what anything costs and so want to be insured for everything-- he brings up the case of lasix, which went on the free market and the price adjusted accordingly . . . we've gone so far in the care/harm department with health care that the spending is utterly bonkers;
4) on the other hand, regulation can also have benefits-- the regulation of leaded gasoline in the late 70's and early 80's, despite Ronald Reagan's attempt to cripple the EPA and its ability to make that change (sound familiar, Scott Pruitt, bringer of asthma and global warming) was ill-founded . . . as are Trump's trade tariffs (it's Smoot-Hawley all over again . . . Smoot-Hawley! anyone? Bueller?)
5) the tug of war between these two groups is significant and important-- the debate between those that are primarily concerned with care/harm and making the world fair and free for as many people as possible-- and those that are concerned with groups and loyalty and liberty and authority and sanctity, as well as the former principles . . . and that's the most important thing that many liberals need to understand, that conservatives es still care about care/harm and fairness, just in slightly different ways;
6) Haidt's final advice is that if you want to truly understand another perspective, follow the sacredness-- I've had conservatives tell me that I don't actually care about endangered species and the environment, because they can't believe that someone would be sincere about that-- and I have trouble truly believing that people are sincere about religion or truly care if gay people get married . . . but we have to try to see why people believe these things, which all make sense in the context of what is sacred . . . and we have to remember that though there are more than two types of people, "once people join a political team, they get ensnared in its moral matrix" and follow the grand narrative of that party . . . but liberals are conservatives are yin and yang and both necessary for the health of a political system;
7) he ends by saying that libertarians and conservatives certainly provide a valuable counterweight to "liberal reform movements" but he sees two liberal points which are profoundly important to the health of society:
"governments can and should restrain corporate superorganisms"
and
"some big problems CAN be solved by regulation"
and I think these are the two points that we need to all come together about, we are rapidly destroying our environment and our resources, and we are rapidly being consumed by larger and larger corporate entities, which have captured the government, making all this tug-of-war and debating utterly useless, if the people no longer have any say in what happens to our country.
1) while there are more than two kinds of people, our political system breaks us down that way-- unfortunately, there should be room for libertarians (who give even less of a shit about things than liberals do, but really care about liberty/oppression and have even less empathy than conservatives)
2) you can tell someone's political beliefs by the kind of dog breed they prefer: gentle and independent versus loyal, protective and wary of strangers;
3) Haidt admits that liberals go too far sometimes in their reflexive anti-business stance, and they could endorse the wonders of the free market to solve problems-- he makes a great analogy with food and the silliness of having food insurance, instead of knowing the prices for items and shopping around and buying what works, versus health insurance, where we have no clue what anything costs and so want to be insured for everything-- he brings up the case of lasix, which went on the free market and the price adjusted accordingly . . . we've gone so far in the care/harm department with health care that the spending is utterly bonkers;
4) on the other hand, regulation can also have benefits-- the regulation of leaded gasoline in the late 70's and early 80's, despite Ronald Reagan's attempt to cripple the EPA and its ability to make that change (sound familiar, Scott Pruitt, bringer of asthma and global warming) was ill-founded . . . as are Trump's trade tariffs (it's Smoot-Hawley all over again . . . Smoot-Hawley! anyone? Bueller?)
5) the tug of war between these two groups is significant and important-- the debate between those that are primarily concerned with care/harm and making the world fair and free for as many people as possible-- and those that are concerned with groups and loyalty and liberty and authority and sanctity, as well as the former principles . . . and that's the most important thing that many liberals need to understand, that conservatives es still care about care/harm and fairness, just in slightly different ways;
6) Haidt's final advice is that if you want to truly understand another perspective, follow the sacredness-- I've had conservatives tell me that I don't actually care about endangered species and the environment, because they can't believe that someone would be sincere about that-- and I have trouble truly believing that people are sincere about religion or truly care if gay people get married . . . but we have to try to see why people believe these things, which all make sense in the context of what is sacred . . . and we have to remember that though there are more than two types of people, "once people join a political team, they get ensnared in its moral matrix" and follow the grand narrative of that party . . . but liberals are conservatives are yin and yang and both necessary for the health of a political system;
7) he ends by saying that libertarians and conservatives certainly provide a valuable counterweight to "liberal reform movements" but he sees two liberal points which are profoundly important to the health of society:
"governments can and should restrain corporate superorganisms"
and
"some big problems CAN be solved by regulation"
and I think these are the two points that we need to all come together about, we are rapidly destroying our environment and our resources, and we are rapidly being consumed by larger and larger corporate entities, which have captured the government, making all this tug-of-war and debating utterly useless, if the people no longer have any say in what happens to our country.
A Book to Help Liberals Understand Conservatives
If you're reading this blog, then you are probably a secular liberal like me (and you're most definitely WEIRD like me: Western and educated, from an industrialized, rich, democratic nation) and you probably need to read Jonathan Haidt's book The Righteous Mind: Why Good People are Divided by Politics and Religion . . . I've written about Haidt's basic ideas here in previous posts, but his book goes into much greater detail and also describes the experiments and readings that helped him to understand the different moral matrices that liberals and conservatives use to understand the world; essentially, conservatives care about more stuff than liberals-- while liberals tend to base their morality on the principles of fairness and harm, conservatives-- who do care about those values-- are also concerned with authority, purity and loyalty . . . so conservatives tend to understand how liberals view things better than liberals understand how conservatives view things; most of these moral characteristics are due to deep-seated personality traits, which are mainly genetic-- things like being open to new experiences and agreeable and neurotic, so there seem to be differences in liberals and conservatives at the most basic level; the book really enlightened me about the benefits of religion-- I wish I were religious, but like a typical liberal, I consider it a bunch of supernatural mumbo-jumbo that wastes your time and money-- but while religion may have started because we have a natural proclivity to see agency everywhere, whether it's a face in the tree or gods behind the thunder-- it has become a valuable asset for members, who experience happiness and social capital, give more to charity, belong to an in group, and have costly rules of purity and sanctity which bond them to other members of the group . . . while it will never work for me, I can see how groups of humans that had religion could have outcompeted groups that did not have religion (and Haidt presents an argument against the principles of the Sam Harris/Richard Dawkins new-atheist crowd, who see religion as a parasite that takes over human brain and eventually leads to things like suicide bombers-- Haidt makes a compelling argument that suicide bombers, who might need insipration from an in-group, are historically only in response to boots on the ground appression and more of a military tactic from a tribe than a radical response based on belief) anyway, the WEIRDER you are the more you see the world as individual objects and not groups until you might eventually try to boil everything down to one set of utilitarian rules, as Jeremy Bentham did . . . Haidt speculates that Bentham might have been autistic, a high-functioning systemizer with very little empathy that made morality into a formulaic algorithm which computes the greater good but does not think about the individual moral emotions within the context of the decision-- while this method might be a decent way to formulate policy, it's often political suicide (economists know that immigrants lead to a net gain in the economy, but apparently many conservatives don't care-- they are more considered with the rule of law and the sanctity of our borders) and it took a long trip to India for Haidt to recognize that other people and cultures place a much greater value on group morality, while everyone cares about liberty/oppression and fairness/cheating and care/harm, only conservatives truly care about loyalty/betrayal and authority/subversion and sanctity/degradation . . . and these are all more important to the group . . . at first, Haidt had a typical WEIRD view of India-- it had rigid social classes and gender roles, it was a sexist society that had limited mobility and a lot of unnecessary rules about eating and prayer, but then he saw that though things weren't as fair as in the West, the connections and order between groups was strong and that was what was valued . . . it's really hard, as a liberal, to put yourself into a conservative's shoes . . . it's hard to feel sanctity towards a religious text or a symbol or an institution that you think is silly, it's hard to find a love for authority when your deepest desire is to see authority subverted, and it's hard to value loyalty when you think it leads to racism and oppression, but if the liberals in our country don't come to understand this, then they are going to destroy their chances of making utilitarian policy changes that can lead to the greater good and instead will remain mired in partisan ugliness . . . Trump is easily explained in this context-- he wants to make America pure and great again, and return us to rule of law, he's an authoritarian figure, totally loyal to our country and nothing else . . . Haidt gives liberals a tool to understand that conservatives are not all insane racist lunatics, and are quite sincere in the things that they care about, things which often do increase social capital, especially in groups . . . it's not my cup of tea, but at least I understand things a bit more after reading this book and can empathize with the conservative point of view . . . and I can see the roots of my genetics in my children, who are open to experience and care about fairness and harm, but couldn't give two shits about loyalty, sanctity, and authority . . . even though my wife and I sort of try to value these virtues, as most parents do, even at the basic level of don't cheat, respect your teachers, and stop picking your nose . . . but none of it is working with them and they're going to end up as WEIRD secular liberals just like their mom and dad.
Broken and Bad Memories
Catherine and I are rewatching Breaking Bad with the kids and we've made it to Season 5; we are recognizing that the odd nostalgia we had for Walter White was unwarranted, distorted by time, and probably caused by our fondness for Hal on Malcolm in the Middle.
Where the Beer Really Flows Like Wine
The slopes were a little choppy today and Alex and I did one run too many . . . luckily this barn apartment has a hot tub down on the lower level-- the three of us took a soak after banging around the mountain all morning and then we all fell asleep and now I'm drinking a Lost Nation Mosaic IPA, which a reviewer on BeerAdvocate describes as having a "crackery malt base" and "earthy berry notes" to go with its "lemony citrus" notes . . . best Spring Break ever (aside from the lack of dog) because in Vermont, the beer actually does flow like wine (and people describe it as such).
Tamiflu + Beer = The Inevitable
Last night's beer drinking didn't go so well-- apparently, Tamiflu and Hermit Thrush Po Tweet sour pale ale do NOT mix well . . . my stomach turned into a bubbling cauldron for thirty minutes or so, until the inevitable happened . . . but I felt better today so I didn't take any sort of medicine and we had a great day on the Jackson Gore side of the mountain, now both my kids are navigating black diamond slopes, so I'm going to have to up my skills to stay with them; my wife and I also took a lovely hike to Buttermilk Falls-- the stupid ingrate children didn't want to go and this made me really miss the dog . . . he would go anywhere with me, happily, and he never gave me any lip-- anyway, I'm off the meds and successfully drinking two of the best beers I've ever tasted:
Foley Brothers Prospect
Lost Nation Lost Galaxy IPA
if you're real nice to me, when I get back to Jersey, I might let you try some.
Foley Brothers Prospect
Lost Nation Lost Galaxy IPA
if you're real nice to me, when I get back to Jersey, I might let you try some.
Ups and Downs on the Mountain
Warm and slushy on the slopes today-- Ian didn't last very long because he slipped and fell on some ice and bruised his knee on the edge of the cast iron firepit-- ouch!-- but Alex and I took an extra trip to the top of the mountain (despite my recent bout of flu) and we went down a steep lift line trail under the Okemo Bubble Quad . . . this is the first time Alex bombed down a real Vermont black diamond run, with no slowing up and no wipeouts: so a banner day for him that I want to commemorate here (and I am sore and feel like an old man . . . my banner is sagging pretty low, but a few delicious local beers should pump some air into it).
Spring Break in a Barn (Loft)!
According to this new episode of Invisibilia, the patterns of your past don't predict your future-- or at least they can't program a computer to accurately predict how well students will do depending on past events (although a white upper-middle-class upbringing seems to give you somewhat of a shock absorber) and I'm definitely feeling the breaking of patterns and randomness today, because we've been playing board games and gin rummy in a converted barn-loft apartment in Vermont, and not only do the outcomes of the games seem unpatterned and random, but so does the setting (lots of kitsch from around the word inside the rambling apartment space, snowy property, a stream, and a hot tub down below in the actual barn . . . perhaps I'll describe more details later but for now, I'm going to enter Spring Break mode and try to put an end to my prolixity for a couple of days).
Mulvaney and Trump Screw Over the Forgotten Men and Women
If you want to get politically indignant about something more substantial than stupid Trump tweets, listen to the newest episode of Planet Money: Mulvaney vs the CFPB . . . it's the story of how Trump completely forgot about the "forgotten men and women" and gutted the agency that could do a great deal to protect them: the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau; Trump chose Republican Mick Mulvaney-- who sponsored a bill to get rid of the CFPB-- to head the CFPB and Mulvaney did exactly what was expected . . . it would be akin to putting me in charge of Disneyworld, I would utterly wreck that joint-- I would let kids buy beer while waiting on line for Space Mountain, I'd let people get out of their seats and take any one item from the Carousel of Progress, I'd put a bounty of the head of a different costumed character each day, I'd add several "shithole countries" to Epcot, etc. etc. . . anway, this is that kind of story and it features some crack investigative reporting, showcases a government that could care less about shady predatory lenders charging interest rates above 900%, and there's an odd ending that adds another layer of pathos . . . this is Ron Swanson writ large, but not as cute because instead of defunding a local Parks and Rec Department, it's declawing an agency that could help vulnerable people being financially destroyed that no recourse, because the government agency that's supposed to enforce the rules and bring suit against these folks in a court of law is dropping cases like mad . . . and for you Trumpists in regards to regulations, there is a case to be made, but there's also the inverse: no regulations are another type of regulation, and Mulvaney took money from the payday loan lobby, possibly to create this environment.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)