'Scuse me while I whip this out

Johno Johno

In a post earlier this week on Bill Parcells, Larry Bird, and the Whole Big Race Thing, I observed that I think

it's funny that affirmed non-liberal Patton also acknowledged the potential third-rail-ness of the question by [jokingly] prefacing his first comment with "well, not to sound illiberal..."

Has Political Correctness turned us all into a nation of pussies, or is merely an epiphenomenon of something else? Last night I was watching a bowdlerized "Blazing Saddles" with every "n**ger" cut out. It wasn't the same movie. Can you even imagine a film like Blazing Saddles getting made today?

Patton latter responds

"we're all just a bit too thin-skinned, which has led us to a place where normal discourse, particularly in politics, but also in art, sport, and other areas, is either neutered to the point of uselessness or poisoned to the point of, well, moveon.org, DU, Ann Coulter, KOS, or a whole bunch of other shrieking nitwits. Picture a ballpark vendor: "Umbrage! Get your umbrage here!"

When I was a serious academic historian, I did a lot of work in African-American history, particularly on the images of black maleness in the late 19th and early 20th centuries as captured in folk ballads and popular song. Characters such as Stagger Lee (later memorialized in the 1956 Billy Price hit of the same name) represented a subtheme of African-American masculinity, an alternate road to renown and greatness separate from the mainstream of American culture. These songs acknowledged that the traditional avenues of the American Dream (land ownership, equality before the law, etc. etc.) were closed off to a great many people in the aftermath of Reconstruction, and instead recounted tales of resistance (to use the Marxian term) in the form of unfettered badassery. Mediating between stories of real criminals, sometimes Robin Hoods but often not, and artificial figures emulating them, the badman ballads of the 1885-1920 era presented homegrown figures to celebrate (and loathe) for people stung by the reversals of Reconstruction and the failed promises of deliverance its end represented. Stagger Lee and his latter-day decendents such as the Black Panthers, Iceberg Slim, Sweet Sweetback, gangsta rappers, and Dee-bo from the movie "Friday" represent an important ongoing theme in American cultural history that has never been fully addressed, much less studied.

But I digress. The reason I stopped working on this stuff was it was becoming too difficult to be a good historian, that is, progress along tangled lines of inquiry with an open mind, without worrying too much about political bullcrap or whether this white boy from Ohio is even allowed to speak about issues of African-American male identity, even 140 years ago. Between the tacit understanding that no serious historian would spend time analyzing the sex scenes in "Sweet Sweetback's Baadasssss Song" (a character who was named, by the way, at the age of 12 for the sweetness of his sweetback by a prostitute) for how they addressed and reinterpreted continuing themes in American cultural history, and the very overt understanding that if I were ever to present my work in conference I'd better be ready to eat a mountain of crap, I lost my taste for it. Moreover, I got sick walking on eggshells, trying very carefully not to be insensitive to all and sundry in the course of working out what all of it means.

The reason I bring all this up is to argue that, despite Dinesh D'Souza's fatuous argument, "The End of Racism" has not yet come. The major issues are sewn up, the big issues are settled, and racism has gone underground where it's harder to fight, but it's not dead. The battles now are so subtle, so intangible, that it's possible (easy, common as dirt) to go way to far to the other side and see racism where none could possibly exist. The word "niggardly," anyone?

It's very difficult to speak in a nuanced fashion about race, and even harder to evoke a nuanced response-- that is, "have a discussion". Why is it only getting harder?

Posted by Johno Johno on   |   § 7

Taste

Johno Johno

At the peril of igniting a flamewar, I have this to say: lay off the Gipper.

I don't direct this at fools like Kos or Ted Rall who are beyond help or reason. I mean the bands of partisans who are wearing metaphorical sackcloth and ashes and beating their breasts over the death of a 93-year old citizen of the republic who, at the end of the day, was just a citizen. To hear FOX news tell it, Reagan single-handedly tore down the Iron Curtain, shit bullets, and invited Marines to dine nightly at the White House, all the while restoring America to greatness. While there's something to that, after a while it all seems rather indecent.

We have had a weeklong period of mourning with the same 24-hour news coverage afforded Laci Peterson, OJ, and a semen-streaked blue dress, capped off by a federal holiday (ironic, considering the cost and who it's for), and now keepers of the flame want Reagan's name or countenance on the Pentagon, the Mall (now, not 25 years from now), the $10, the $20, the 50-cent piece, and the dime. Isn't it enough that an airport and the largest Federal building in Washington (again, in a Churchillian grumble, i-rony) bear the guy's name?

While Reagan was the father of modern conservatism, and while (yes, yes) modern conservatives are perhaps underrepresented in memorials, I offer two thoughts. First, modern liberal Presidents outnumber conservatives about ten to one, with the other great modern conservative being dim star Richard Nixon. Therefore it's fitting that there are memorials to Wilson, Kennedy and Roosevelt (a three-termer, let's not forget) on our currency or the Mall. Moreover, the 25-year moratorium on memorials for Presidents is in place to ensure that history remembers well the man the monuments stand for. Can you imagine if the Mall were littered with the Garfield Memorial, the Taft Memorial, and the Calvin Coolidge Memorial Wishing Fountain? The bills currently in Congress to replace Hamilton on the $10 and Jackson on the $20 are particularly laughable. Replace the father of American Finance? The father of American popular democracy? Please. Of course, a flag-burning amendment has once again made it out of Senate committee, so I can't take any of this too seriously.

[*Initiate snark sequence*] Where is the mad rush to place memorials to LBJ in every corner of the country? His was the last state funeral (if I'm not mistaken), and he was the closest Democratic cousin to Reagan in terms of legacy and impact. [*Ending snark sequence*]

I just wish Reagan's partisans could have a sense of perspective, of restraint. Reagan wasn't a king, and he definitely wasn't superman, and a week-long national spasm of grief and plaudits followed by a mad rush to erect statues assuring future generations of his greatness seems, well, kind of crass.

[wik] All this being said, I will never forget the sight of Mikhail Gorbachev, the last leader of the United States' enemy for most of the last century, paying his respects to Ronald Reagan in the Congressional Rotunda.

Posted by Johno Johno on   |   § 5

Brother Ray hits the road

Johno Johno

Ray Charles is dead at 73.

Ray Charles was a genius. His combination of blues, soul, gospel, jazz, swing, and barrelhouse piano was his alone, and although he is remembered best as a hacky spokesman for Diet Pepsi, he was a giant among giants. Nobody put the various threads of American music together like he did, especially not as early, and though he shied away from the spotlight in his last years, his live performances remained heartstoppers.

Man, I hate it when this happens.

Posted by Johno Johno on   |   § 3

A Convenient Guide to American Politics

Ross Ross

Because the issues are so complicated, I've constructed this handy guide to American political principles! It comes in easy-to-digest table form, and as an outsider, I hope I can do my little part to bring a little light and knowledge into all of your lives. This absence has been lengthier than I expected, as my brain recovers from too much working. Read on, beneath the fold...

Issue

Left

Right

Nutjob

Foreign Policy

The military we have is wasteful and not as necesary as it once was. With diplomacy and economic assistance we can get further internationally. Redirect resources from the military into education and social programs here, and economic assistance overseas. It is sometimes appropriate to use military force to intervene in human rights situations.

America's military should be used for defense. In the face of an immediate threat or an attack, hit and hit hard. The military isn't big enough -- it needs to be expanded so that it can effortlessly perform this task. Encourage military service. The military is intended to defend America and its interests, not protect the rights of others around the world.

We can and should use America's military to force political change in other countries and areas of the world. Campaign against "Nation Building", then proceed on the largest, riskiest, and essentially reward-free plan of nation-building ever attempted. Execute plans to make wholesale change in the social and cultural fabric of the middle east; use plans designed by people with no military experience. Ignore professional opinions on the matter.

Education

The federal government should use tax dollars to help schools in poor areas; it should ensure that funding is equally spread around so that all students get a fair chance at an education. Federal dollars can help with secondary education as well, and the federal government should use affirmative action to help bridge racial divides.

Education is strictly a local matter; the federal government shouldn't be involved. Localities should be free to do whatever they want in terms of affirmative action, equality, and so forth. States may choose to ensure equal funding of diverse regions.

Tout the "Texas Education Miracle", which turned out to be the product of mendacious school administrators, who frantically cut students out of their schools via expulsion and transfer in order to meet education goals set with no methods. Make no mention of this statistical fraud after it was discovered; instead, proceed with an identical plan at the federal level. Impose the federal government into the core issues in classrooms -- how the basics are taught. Demand that all localities teach a curriculum that can pass standardized tests. Tie funding to tests, and ensure that students learn nothing but what is on the tests.

Tax cuts

We should only cut taxes if the budget is balanced. We should try to cut taxes for the poor first. We can use the tax system to encourage social policies, and give tax breaks to encourage things like environmentalism.

Tax cuts are something to strive for, but the budget must be balanced. We favor across the board tax cuts. The tax system should never be used for social ends. A progressive tax system is acceptable, but we should strive for a flat tax system.

We should focus tax cuts on the top brackets, with the intent of increasing investment and the flow of capital. We should ignore payroll taxes and total tax burdens. We should ignore the AMT fiasco that is only a few years out. Since the American public doesn't know the difference between an average and a median, we don't feel the need to educate them, and we will use it for political effect. Since deficits don't matter, any and every tax cut is an appropriate thing to do. If deficits do turn out to matter, we'll just deal with that when it happens, and if it means dramatic and unplanned alterations in the structure of the federal government, so be it. Argue that if tax cuts for the wealthy are reversed, it's a tax increase for all citizens.

Rhetoric

Moving society towards a future with equal opportunity for all is an unfinished task; the federal government has an active role to play here. Because states have varying social environments, we need to have a level playing fields across the entire country.

Reducing the size of the federal government and regaining states' rights is critical. Government needs to do less, not more. The tax burden on the economy needs to be reduced. Fiscal responsibility is a must; we are the party of hard-edged realism, and we don't shirk when tough decisions have to be made. We'll cut what we have to, and run a tight ship. Equality of opportunity isn't possible, so the federal government shouldn't have anything much to say about it. States can try whatever they want to.

America can do anything; it's not patriotic to think otherwise. If we just believe, there's no limit to what we can accomplish. Criticizing the administration during wartime is giving aid and comfort to the enemy. A strong leader never modifies his public statements. Say as little as possible; a stake never placed in the ground can't be tripped over later. Pretend that the left seeks equality of outcome while pursuing policies that guarantee inequality of outcome. Secretly seek to create a new class of wealthy financiers of the political class; create laws designed to benefit industries and individuals who "play ball". Tilt the playing field towards friends of those in power, then whine about "obeying the rule of law" as being the most important thing. Use the rhetoric of war to package conventional attacks together with extraordinary measures to assault terrorism; use that "war on terror" as cover for a conventional warfare to create change in the middle east. Other nations are to be disregarded, and international law does not apply to a sovereign America. A President can do anything if he perceives that the security of the nation is at risk; in such situations, laws do not apply.

Financial Policy

Government has a role; our taxes are a reasonable price to pay for critical services. We need a federal government to monitor certain private organizations and entitires for the good of all.

Reducing the size of government is important. We rely too much on the government for services; the government shouldn't be in the business of providing them. Allow some of these to devolve back to the community and state level; reduce the size of the federal government overall.

Deficits don't matter. Economic expansion cures everything. Tax cuts for the wealthy cure every ailment in the economy, and therefore contribute to everything.

States' Rights

Federal power should be used to address issues of equality, rights, religion, and the environment. States should not have the power to create a hostile atmosphere or impinge upon equality.

Federal power should be reduced, and states should simply make their own decisions on these matters. The federal government should not be involved.

The federal government should promote religion and observance, and should allow full participation of religious groups in all levels of government. Federal policy decisions can and should be made on the basis of religion. Morality should be proscribed and legislated according to Judeo-Christian values, but not in a literal sense.

Race

The federal government needs to ensure that equality is applied to all. The federal government must push forward on this issue and hold states accountable. Affirmative action is acceptable and proper for now, and is perhaps appropriate reparation for the past.

The treatment of race is a local and state matter; the federal government does not need to be involved. The basic rights guaranteed in the constitution are adequate; we do not need more legislation in this area. If a locality decides affirmative action is appropriate, that is a local matter. Reparations are a nice idea, but aren't going to happen.

The federal government should be actively involved in ensuring that affirmative action programs do not proceed; it should sue and be a party to court actions where affirmative action is to be decided. Race as an issue is over, and no longer requires any action on the part of the government. We should instead focus resources on ensuring that no favorable treatment is given to minorities. The idea of reparations is offensive; we all have "oppression" in our past.

Legacy

Bill Clinton represented what we really need in a President -- big ideas, big analysis, capability, and being the smartet guy in the room. Clinton was a classic overachiever, but a flawed individual. His "morality issues" were irrelevant to his Presidency. If would could have those days back, would we? We'd rather have a President with a few problems than a country with a lot of problems. Clinton's Presidency resembled his past -- brilliant overachiever and policy thinker, with personality and character issues.

A strong sense of character must be combined with strong fiscal responsibility. A President must be committed to reducing the size of government and to balancing the budget. Realism and minimalism must dominate Presidential thinking. Make hard decisions, and make them fast. Republican Presidencies look like their careers -- a tough climb up, demonstrated competence and knowledge, realism, and strong leadership.

"Never Vary". Serious people don't need to explain themselves; you can be assured that affairs are being run competently. You may not read the memo. We are in extraordinary times. The experienced and highly competent people we added to the adminstration to gain public trust in the "team" turned out to be disloyal when they reacted to the real effects of the team's policies. The new black is white. An ever-growing list of failed promises and policies fails to yield a single successful major initiative. GWB's Presidency bears astonishing resemblance to his career -- abject failure, punctuated by brief externally imposed successes by having the right family name.

Homosexuality

Live and let live; the federal government has a role to play in ensuring that we have legislation in place that ensures equality over the country as a whole. Gay marriage/civil unions are fine and should be recognized everywhere in full faith and credit. Legislation that enforces equality in the workplace and other areas of life is necessary. Federal legislation must override state laws that criminalize homosexuality.

Disapprove of gay marriage, but believe that the federal government doesn't have a role to play in deciding the question. Believes that states should not have to respect civil unions granted in other states. The gay lifestyle is immoral and should not be encouraged. We do not need laws to create an artifical "equality" in the workplace, and we do not need federal law in this area.

The federal government should pass a constitutional amendment prohibiting gay marriage and civil unions nationwide, overriding any state legislation on the matter. Anti-gay sentiment should relentlessly be used as a political tool. Since being gay is a matter of "choice", public funds should be diverted to organizations that preach "conversion".

Self-Perceived Strengths

Compassion; fighting for "the little guy", standing up against corporations, equality for all, environmentalism.

Realism, respect for tradition, reduction in burden, individual rights, property rights.

Moral correctness, monothematic policy, might makes right. Adapt the facts, not the ideology.
Posted by Ross Ross on   |   § 2

No sue for you!

Johno Johno

CNN brings us a breath of fresh legal air. In 1998, Jane Costa sued the Boston Red Sox for half a mil because she got hit in the face by a foul ball. The suit has been dismissed by a state court panel. Costa, who was "more than angry. I was in critical condition,"gets nothing, though she is reportedly upset that the Sox are "bickering over millions and millions of dollars to hit a ball, and when one of their fans get hurt, they don't care."

Why did this take six years to resolve? Didn't she read the back of her Red Sox ticket? I did!

By use of this ticket, the ticket holder agrees that... [t]he holder assumes all risk and danger incidental to the game of baseball, or preparation therefor, including specifically (but not exclusively) the danger of being injured by thrown or flying bats and thrown or batted balls and agrees that the participating clubs, their agents and players are not liable for injuries resulting from such causes.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and assume that Ms. Costa is one of those "casual (read:"non") fans" who litter ballparks, the proportion of which to actual fans rises the closer one sits to the infield. Not a casual fan like my wife, who when she accompanies me to a game takes a good book for the slow parts but remains alert to the possibility of high-speed projectiles (as vanishingly unlikely as they are in the right-field grandstands underneath the balcony), but a casual fan who jabbers on their cell phone the entire game, is upanddownupanddown in the middle of tense at-bats and sighs/bitches loudly in the fourth inning that the game is taking so loooooong.

If I have mischaracterized Ms. Costa's fandom, I'm sorry. But odds are this next statement is for her: if you are lucky enough to have dugout seats, watch the goddamn game. Hell, if you were bored, perhaps you should have perused the words written in red capitals on the back of your ticket. I'm sorry you took one in the face. I bet that hurt. But still.

Posted by Johno Johno on   |   § 4

Juxtaposition

Johno Johno

Larry Bird today: "[Basketball] is a black man's game, and it will be forever"

Later in the same interview: "The one thing that always bothered me when I played in the NBA was I really got irritated when they put a white guy on me."

Bill Parcells yesterday: "Mike wants the defense to do well, and Sean, he's going to have a few ... no disrespect for the Orientals, but what we call Jap plays. OK. Surprise things."

Bill Parcells has apologized, abjectly and repeatedly. Larry Bird has not yet apologized (though the interview does't air until tomorrow). Should he feel compelled to?

Discuss.

Posted by Johno Johno on   |   § 12

Life'll kill ya

Johno Johno

When he puts his mind to it and appends more than a fatuous and ill-considered "heh" or "indeed" to someone else's comments, Glenn Reynolds can write. His Tech Central Station columns are usually thought-provoking at least, and this week's is no exception. He tackles an issue that is close to my heart at the moment: aging.

I'm turning 30 in a few weeks, and even though I know in my head that it's not a big deal, not like birth, dying, or having a kid, I still can't shake a certain sense of temporal vertigo. As GeekLethal wrote a few weeks ago, time's a bitch (I paraphrase). Basically, 30 means I can't in any way at all possibly whatsoever be a kid anymore.

Glenn's piece is a musing on age-extending technologies. In answer to the inevitable critics of Methuselah drugs and whatnot, who might argue that the planet is overpopulated as it is, etc. etc., he writes

I've watched people I love age and die, and it wasn't "beautiful and natural." It sucked. Aging is a disease. Cataracts and liver spots don't bring moral enlightenment or spiritual transcendence. Death may be natural -- but so are smallpox, rape, and athlete's foot. "Natural" isn't the same as "good."

Well said. Not an argument, exactly, but well said. "Natural" gave us hemp underwear, hippies, and the clap. To hell with natural. And long live, well, me!

Posted by Johno Johno on   |   § 1

Huzzah

Johno Johno

NDR of The Rhine River just doesn't seem to get this whole blogging thing. Instead of tossing off snarky, ill-considered polemics on current events at a furious pace, he keeps issuing thoughtful, interesting, and well-written posts on relatively obscure topics.

Check out two of his most recent: Why Not Marry Your Rapist?, about a terrible case in Ethiopia, and A Tale of Two Frances, which discusses the vexed legacy of Alsatians who fought for Germany during Dubya Dubya Two:

Thursday will be the sixtieth anniversary of one of the most notorious massacres of the war. Surprised by the D-Day invasion, German troops were sent into Vichy France (the technically autonomous France in the south) in order to shore up security. Near Bordeaux, a unit of the Waffen SS massacred almost the entire population of the small town of Oradour-sur-Glane. The men were separated out and shot. The women and children were shut up in the church, asphyxiated, shot, and burned. 642 people died.

As shocking as the event was, it was discovered after the war that fourteen of the German soldiers were Alsatians:malgré-nous, people who were considered German citizens (Reichsdeutsch). Because the National Socialists considered Alsatians to be Aryan and ethnically German, they were obligated to serve the state as other Germans. Furthermore, the Nazis were anxious to show the participation of Alsatians in the Reich. Many Alsatian men were forced to serve in the military–often members of their families were held hostage or were harmed in order to compel them to fight. Most malgré-nous fought on the Eastern Front in the Waffen SS (the military division of the SS, often given the most arduous missions). . . .

A court in Bordeaux tried the Alsatian soldiers, along with seven Germans, in 1953 and condemned them. But the sentence caused outrage in Alsace. People felt that the rest of France did not understand the unique suffering that they experienced during the war. Not just occupied, the Nazis put tremendous pressure on the Alsatians to integrate and Germanize. . . .

Dialogue between the two is still difficult. The Limousin demand recognition of the massacre, and they are unwilling to recognize the precarious situation in which Alsatians found themselves. In the 1980s, one of the malgré-nous sued for a military pension (something which he would be entitled to despite fighting for Germany), but was lambasted by a storm of public opinion.

I did not know that.

As an olive branch to the people of the Limousin region, here via epicurious is a recipe for a traditional Limousin dessert: clafouti:

1/3 cup plus 1 tablespoon sugar
2 tablespoons all-purpose flour
2 large eggs
2/3 cup milk
1 1/2 teaspoons vanilla
1/2 teaspoon orange zest
1/4 teaspoon almond extract
1/4 teaspoon salt
1 cup Bing cherries, halved and pitted
1/2 tablespoon unsalted butter, cut into bits
vanilla ice cream as an accompaniment if desired

Preheat the oven to 400°F. In a blender blend together 1/3 cup of the sugar, the flour, the eggs, the milk, the vanilla, the zest, the almond extract, and the salt until the custard is just smooth. Arrange the cherries in one layer in a buttered 3-cup gratin dish or flameproof shallow baking dish, pour the custard over them, and bake the clafouti in the middle of the oven for 20 to 25 minutes, or until the top is puffed and springy to the touch. Sprinkle the top with the remaining 1 tablespoon sugar, dot it with the butter, and broil the clafouti under a preheated broiler about 3 inches from the heat for 1 minute, or until it is browned. Serve the clafouti with the ice cream.

When I make this, I sometimes use blueberries, since I do live in New England near the source of those wonderful low-bush Maine berries, but cherries are traditional and delicious.

Posted by Johno Johno on   |   § 6
Subscribe to