Gold bug in the garden of eden on a perfectly flat earth.
I’ve noticed the high level of economic illiteracy in the country since the day I started seriously studying economics. I’ve also noticed that faith-based economics rules the thought processes of many politicians. It always reminds me of those folks that believe in a literal garden of eden and a 7 day creation story over the facts that science hands us day-in and day-out. Molecular Biology has pretty much trumped their views but they persist in sticking their fingers in their ears and going la la la la la.
A variety of misguided notions have taken up residence in the brains of the same people, so I suppose it’s not surprising that the same groups that scream war on christmas also think the US will go bankrupt if we don’t up the debt ceiling or some such nonsense. The problem is that anti-intellectual flat earthers control a political party in this country. That problem extends to people who now sit as chairs of congressional committees that deal with the real world and real people. Then, there’s the fact that the other political party doesn’t really fight for the truth. It’s just all very distressing to me.
There are two stories today that I’d like to use as evidence to point to the incredible amount of lunacy floating around today’s Republican Party. The first comes from Paul Krugman. The second from The Economist. Krugman talks about the persistence of gold buggery. (Yes, I’m using a double entendre.) The Economistabout the persistence of federal deficit and debt myths. They write on the number of people that don’t seem to understand what it takes for the US to ‘default’. Both myths need airing.
Paul Krugman writes political op-ed as well as information on economics. Economists are trained to separate the two. We even have two names for the circumstances. It’s called discussing positive and normative economics. You teach principles of economics students how to distinguish between the two on the very first day of class. Some times I think Dr. Krugman forgets that most people and politicians are economic illiterates. You see and hear constant confusion on his writings. People don’t seem to distinguish between his op-ed with the liberal bent (normative) and when he’s actually talking economic theory (positive). His op-ed today talks about the fact that there are many issues in politics today that are so polarizing that there is no third way or middle ground. I don’t want to point to that, but his blog post ‘Monetary Morality’ that takes this notion of no compromising with idiots which points to the absurdity of gold buggery or something he called paleomonetarism in an early post.
In those two posts, he points out that there is a narrative out there–mostly preached by the Pauls–that the Fed is evil and we need to be hung on a cross of gold (with apologies to William Jennings Bryan). If you read the two posts you’ll see that this issues isn’t a conversation or liberal issue at all. Economists have a shared understanding of theory that doesn’t include the Paul money narrative. The Paul monetary narrative is not about economics, it’s about some idea that the government and a central bank is some how confiscating something from you. It’s a philosophy of paranoia more than an economic statement.
You see, if you’re the kind of person who views being taxed to pay for social insurance programs as tyranny, you’re also going to be the kind of person who sees the printing of fiat money by a government-sponsored central bank as confiscation. You may try to produce evidence about the terrible things that happen under fiat currencies; you may insist that hyperinflation is just around the corner; but ultimately the facts don’t matter, it’s the immorality of activist monetary policy that you hate.
And this is also why politically conservative economists arguing for something like nominal GDP targeting, and pleading with their perceived political allies to stop talking nonsense, are going to be disappointed. If you’re in the intellectual universe where monetary policy is to be evaluated by results, you’re already out of the true believers’ moral universe. At a fundamental level, Milton Friedman and John Maynard Keynes are on one side; Ron Paul is on the other. And it’s not a debate in which evidence really matters.
The Pauls–and others–dwell in the land (Kentucky, I think) where you can create a theme park and put Neanderthals and all sorts of Dinosaurs that lived millions of years apart with modern animals in the Garden of Eden. All that’s needed in these narratives is the idea that the sun revolves around the earth or the earth is flat. It’s not science, it’s not data based, it’s just you wanting to believe your little view of the world is the correct one for no other reason than it appeals to your outlook on life.
The FBI said it searched eight addresses in Minneapolis and Chicago Friday. Warrants suggest agents were looking for connections between local anti-war activists and groups in Colombia and the Middle East.
[….]
FBI spokesman Paul Bresson said Saturday that the bureau’s investigations “are predicated on criminal violations, not First Amendment protected activities.”
When reached Friday, FBI spokesman Steve Warfield declined to provide details of the searches, but said there was no imminent threat to the community and the agency wasn’t anticipating any arrests “at this time.” He said the FBI was seeking evidence related to “activities concerning the material support of terrorism.”
The peace activists were subpoenaed to appear before a grand jury in Chicago. The groups apparently were originally targeted after they participated in protests at the Republican Convention in 2008.
It turns out the FBI used a spy to infiltrate the Minnesota group and report back on their activities. Shades of COINTELPRO. Democracy Now reported on the story yesterday.
Minneapolis, MN – At a press conference here, Jan. 12, Jess Sundin of the Twin Cites based Anti-War Committee (AWC) blasted police infiltration of the anti-war and international solidarity movement, stating, “We are here today to express outrage that our democratic rights have been violated by a government operation of spying, infiltration and disruption of our anti-war movement, which was carried out over the course of at least two and half years.”
The exposure of an undercover law enforcement agent in the Twin Cities anti-war movement is linked to the Sept. 24, 2010 FBI raids on peace and international solidarity organizers and the subpoenas that have been served on 23 activists to appear in front of a Chicago Grand Jury.
The infiltrator, who used the name ‘Karen Sullivan,’ joined the AWC in April 2008, and about a year later she joined the Freedom Road Socialist Organization. A statement from the Committee to Stop FBI Repression notes, “In conversations between our attorneys and the prosecutor’s office in Chicago, we have had confirmation that Karen Sullivan was in fact a law enforcement officer working undercover.”
Sundin said, “In April 2008, law enforcement officer Karen Sullivan joined the Anti-War Committee. In 2008, we were involved in organizing the anti-war marches on the first and last days of the Republican National Convention in Saint Paul. At that time, there was a massive security operation here which included the infiltration of the RNC Welcoming Committee. We now have it confirmed that in this same time period, we too became the subject of government investigation. The difference is that our spy made herself comfortable and decided to stay awhile, posing as a fellow anti-war activist and pretending to befriend us.”
I’m going to focus this post on news and opinions relating to Jared Lee Loughner, the Arizona mass murderer. The news media is so focused on this story, it’s hard to find much else.
First, let me say that it has become abundantly clear that Loughner suffers from paranoid schizophrenia–a least I’m going to assume that unless someone comes up with a better explanation for his symptoms. I immediately suspected it when I first read descriptions of his behavior by people who knew him, but the more I read about him the more clear it becomes that Loughner suffers from this terrible illness.
Schizophrenia is characterized by a broad range of unusual behaviors that cause profound disruption in the lives of the patients suffering from the condition and in the lives of the people around them. Some common symptoms of schizophrenia are delusions, hallucinations (usually auditory), disorganized thought and speech, social withdrawal, and emotional unresponsiveness (flat affect).
Based on news reports, Loughner appears to be suffering from all of these symptoms. He was apparently experiencing delusions of persecution and delusions of control (e.g., his belief that the government was using mind control on him).
What Loughner did was driven by his delusions and his disorganized thought processes. Despite the repulsive campaign rhetoric used by tea party politicians like Sarah Palin and Sharron Angle, it really isn’t accurate to blame their words for Loughner’s crimes. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try to shame politicians into speaking and behaving more civilly, but the real outrage is that this young man was able to buy a gun and ammunition. Loughner was a walking time bomb, and he lived in a state that allows people to buy guns easily and to carry concealed weapons without a permit!
Let’s condemn conservative politicians for helping to make guns far too easily available to troubled people and liberals for refusing to stand up to the gun nuts.
If you read this Wall Street Journal article, you’ll see examples of Loughner’s disordered thinking and communication. The WSJ writers found a collection of postings by Loughner to an on-line gaming forum. He talked about his inability to get a job and his failure with women, and sometimes his comments became bizarre and disturbing.
Look at these examples from the article:
On April 24, Mr. Loughner titled a new online thread: “Would you hit a Handy Cap Child/ Adult?” He wrote: “This is a very interesting question….There are mental retarded children. They’re possessing teachers that are typing for money. This will never stop….The drug addicts need to be weeded out to be more intelligent. The Principle of this is that them c— educators need to stop being pigs.”
Later that day, he posted a rant titled “Why Rape,” which said women in college enjoyed being raped. “There are Rape victims that are under the influence of a substance. The drinking is leading them to rape. The loneliness will bring you to depression. Being alone for a very long time will inevitably lead you to rape.”
[….]
On May 9 at 2:00 a.m., he asked: “Does anyone have aggression 24/7?” By noon, when others suggested he try smoking marijuana, he said: “No weed. No drugs. It’s not like I can’t see my brain.”
[….]
On June 3 at 12:14 a.m. Mr. Loughner described one confrontation with Mr. McGahee [his college math instructor], writing to his fellow gamers that he had asked the teacher: “Are you just getting a pay check for brainwashing?” as well as questioning if the class was a “scam” and asking, “can you tell me how to Deny math?” He wrote that the teacher told him it was a stupid question and he should “GET OUT OF MY CLASS!”
The next day, after he had to see a school counselor, he wrote: “Told her about brainwashing a child and how that can change the view of mathematics.”
This young man was extremely confused and delusional. It would be impossible for his parents not to have known that he was very ill. We may learn that they tried to get help for him; unfortunately it is not easy to get help for people with psychological disorders. People suffering from schizophrenia resist getting treatment–they don’t realize how sick they are. Furthermore, it is extremely difficult to force someone into treatment. Ironically, Arizona makes committing someone against their will easier than most other states, the state has also cut so much on mental health facilities and workers that services aren’t readily available.
Our mental health system is even more broken than the rest of our health care system. People who talk about “falling through the cracks” are clueless. Our mental health system is nothing but cracks.
I studied countless rampage massacres for my book Going Postal, and this is the first instance I can think of in which the shooter—in this case, 22-year-old Jared Lee Loughner—carried out anything like a hybrid assassination-rampage: first, a planned, targeted assassination of a high-profile political figure, followed immediately by a seemingly indiscriminate shooting rampage. The first part of this hybrid assassination-rampage left a U.S. Congresswoman, Gabby Giffords, in critical condition with a serious head wound; the second part, the rampage, left six dead and another 13 wounded.
These two types of murders have little in common. In America, at least, the assassin is concerned about only one thing: taking out his target. While others may get shot in the confusion, political assassins never, to my knowledge, stick around after accomplishing their primary task just so they can keep murdering others indiscriminately.
[….]
In rampage shootings, on the other hand, media reports often describe the rampage murderer “shooting at random” before the bullet-in-the-head finale. But closer study of these shootings reveals that the attackers often have specific targets in mind—usually bullying supervisors or fellow workers. Sometimes, in the bloodiest cases, the shooter takes aim at the entire “company” or school, making everyone in it an intended target. In many of these cases, the shooters turn out to have been victims themselves of bullying, harassment, and social or financial ruin.
Judging from early reports, Loughner looks to be a pastiche of these two classic profiles.
Let’s assume that we’ve identified a set of characteristics often exhibited by mass murderers. What does that buy us? It enables us to answer the question, “Given that someone is a mass murderer, what characteristics is he likely to exhibit?” That’s an interesting question, but it’s not the one we want to answer. Rather, the question we really want to answer is, “Given that someone exhibits this profile of characteristics, how likely is he to commit mass murder?” Answering this question is extremely difficult because the predictors are invariably far more common than the event we hope to predict, and mass murder is very rare. Although mass murderers often do exhibit bizarre behavior, most people who exhibit bizarre behavior do not commit mass murder.
Media reports about Jared Loughner, the alleged Tucson killer, illustrate this difficulty. His abnormal behavior, however unusual, is still far more common than the crimes of which he is accused.
Hours before Saturday’s shooting, suspected gunman Jared Lee Loughner was stopped by an Arizona Game and Fish officer for running a red light.
Agency spokesman Jim Paxson confirmed Wednesday that an officer made the stop about 7:30 a.m. Saturday on an Interstate 10 access road several miles from the shopping center where congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and 18 other people were gunned down.
Loughner, who was described by the officer as “very forthcoming,” and “very polite, very subdued,” was driving an older-model charcoal gray Chevrolet Nova, which has since been seen parked outside the Loughner family home.
The Pima County Sheriff’s Department released reports on Wednesday detailing contacts with Arizona gunman Jared Loughner and his family prior to Saturday’s shooting — contacts that ranged from petty nuisance complaints to a drug arrest.
[….]
The reports detail all personal contact Pima County deputies had with Loughner beginning on Sept. 23, 2004, when he was the victim of a reported assault.
Loughner was later arrested as a juvenile for possession of alcohol on May 15, 2006, and on Sept. 10, 2007, he also received a citation for possession of drug paraphernalia, according to the police reports.
The police reports do not appear to indicate a violent history. Instead, they reflect a man seemingly prone to destructive tendencies.
Pima Community College in Tucson has released records of its campus police contacts with student Jared Loughner, showing the increasing fear that he stirred in his classmates and teachers.
A thread running through the documents is the difficulty of police finding a context in which to intervene: Until they found a violation of the student code of conduct, or a state law, police officers wrote in the reports that they weren’t sure what else they could do, even when a fellow student said she thought Loughner had brought a knife to class.
The records show no indication that the college took steps to get Loughner any mental health counseling.
Loughner also seemed not to understand the seriousness of the fears. When police spoke with him, Loughner said his free speech rights were being violated, and seemed to have trouble understanding why he had been called out of class.
Here’s a really interesting article by a researcher on why some people act heroically in situations like the Arizona shootings.
Rohit Deshpande, a professor at Harvard Business School, has delved into the science of heroism to find out what causes someone to spring into action despite the danger to help or save someone else.
In his research, Deshpande focused on how hotel workers took extreme risks to protect guests during the deadly terrorist attacks in Mumbai, India, in 2008.
After several desperate hours of explosions and gunfire, members of the kitchen staff locked arms and formed a cordon around guests as the attackers machine-gunned them down.
In another display of heroism, hotel operators stayed at their phones to call rooms with vital information.
[….]
He found heroism had nothing to do with age, gender or religion. It started with personality.
“It seems that they have a much more highly developed moral compass,” he said. “They have this instinct for doing something good for other people. We find this across a whole series of situations.
I’m going to end with an article by Joan Walsh of Salon on why Sarah Palin is too narcissistic and lacking in empathy to ever be elected president.
Good grief! Has Joan Walsh paid any attention to current President Barack Obama’s behavior or George W. Bush’s for that matter? Narcissism and lack of empathy have seemingly become de rigueur for holders of the office these days!
Sooooo…. What are you reading this morning?
Did you like this post? Please share it with your friends:
Click on Max Headroom for a great Wired read on How Max Headroom Predicted the Demise of TV Journalism
While I was doing some grant writing, the Palin video detailing her supposed victimization during the events surrounding the Tucson Massacre was scrubbed. It’s amazing how many things disappear from there these days.
I didn’t watch or read it since I have to admit I have developed a serious tic that only appears when the ex-Governor from Alaska is speaking. It’s been getting worse too. Evidently, her use of the term “Blood Libel” is creating a stir heard round the village. It’s adding to the conversation on what makes up hurtful rhetoric. It also gives us a study on what makes up intellectual and political gravitas. This is a short explanation from Ben Smith’s link via the tweet.
The phrase “blood libel” was introduced into the debate this week by Instapundit’s Glenn Reynolds, and raised some eyebrows because it typically refers historically to the alleged murder of Christian babies by Jews, and has been used more recently by Israeli’s supporters to refer to accusations against the country. It’s a powerful metaphor, and one that carries the sense of an oppressed minority.
Think Progress has some more information up on outcries from Jewish Groups in their recently published item: ‘”Jewish Groups: ‘We Are Deeply Disturbed’ By Palin’s Use Of Anti-Semitic Term ‘Blood Libel,’ She Should Apologize’. Something tells me Palin had no idea about the history of the term when she made the video. She just jumped on it because Beck had used it. This doesn’t surprise me. We have more than a few opinion leaders these days that don’t seem to like to do their homework. At least some of them get staff that to help. Our President is surrounded by people that edit his words carefully because of the impact we all know they can have on the national and international conversation. Palin’s not the President but she’s got a group of people that consider her a leader. Her words do have meaning and effect.
This morning, Palin launched an aggressive Facebook and web-video campaign to counter what she deemed a “blood libel” against her by the media to connect her infamous cross-hairs map and other right-wing incendiary rhetoric to violence.Of all the terms Palin could have used, from “defamation” to even “implicating me in murder,” why did Palin choose “blood libel”? As the conservative National Review’s Jonah Goldberg, who says he “agree[s] entirely with…Palin’s, larger point,” notes, “Historically, the term is almost invariably used to describe anti-Semitic myths about how Jews use blood — usually from children — in their ritual.” Indeed, many Jews consider the term extremely offensive, and the Anti-Defamation League and other prominent Jewish organizations have spoken out against its use dozens of occasions in the past.
Indeed, Jewish groups are taking offense to Palin’s choice of the term. Noting that accusations of blood libel have been “directly responsible for the murder of so many Jews across centuries,” the National Jewish Democratic Council condemned Palin’s use of the term:
Instead of dialing down the rhetoric at this difficult moment, Sarah Palin chose to accuse others trying to sort out the meaning of this tragedy of somehow engaging in a “blood libel” against her and others. This is of course a particularly heinous term for American Jews, given that the repeated fiction of blood libels are directly responsible for the murder of so many Jews across centuries — and given that blood libels are so directly intertwined with deeply ingrained anti-Semitism around the globe, even today. […]
All we had asked following this weekend’s tragedy was for prayers for the dead and wounded, and for all of us to take a step back and look inward to see how we can improve the tenor of our coarsening public debate. Sarah Palin’s invocation of a “blood libel” charge against her perceived enemies is hardly a step in the right direction.
Likewise, the president of the pro-Israel, pro-peace Jewish lobby J Street, Jeremy Ben-Ami, said he was “saddened by Governor Palin’s use of the term ‘blood libel,’” adding that he hopes “she will choose to retract her comment [and] apologize“:
Could this be the reason the video’s been scrubbed? moved to a less prominent place? (updated, see note below)
Wondering if we as Americans really value what we have and whether we really care about leaving a future for the generations to follow.
This started me thinking about what future was left to me by the generations directly before me. Of course, we’re living in a world mostly free of NAZIs and Fascists because of the greatest generation. We’re living in a world where the Jim Crow Laws of Separate-But-Equal were torn down by the generation after that with the sacrifice of the heroic leaders of the civil rights movement. I have the right to vote because of my grandmother’s generation and her mother’s generation and what they did for us. I’ve also had consistent access to family planning and birth control because the first women of the baby boom generation and several generations of women before them worked hard for it. Stonewall made a tremendous difference in the lives of GLBTs. Then, there are programs like Social Security and institutions like the United Nations that came from the vision and leadership of FDR and the people who served in his cabinets like Francis Perkins, Henry Wallace, Cordell Hull and many others. They cared enough to build us quite a legacy.
Today is the 67th anniversary of a speech that was to convey that vision of a post-war America. The Second Bill of Rights was part of a State of the Union speech. I’m bringing this up for two reasons. First, because it clearly provides a road map–even today–for “what Americans really value”. I say that because poll after poll shows that the majority of American’s agree with these values even though our government doesn’t seem to reflect that at the moment. For that reason, I share with you today, the words of a leader with a vision and a gift for elocution.
On January 11, 1944, in the midst of World War II, President Roosevelt spoke forcefully and eloquently about the greater meaning and higher purpose of American security in a post-war America. The principles and ideas conveyed by FDR’s words matter as much now as they did over sixty years ago, and the Franklin D. Roosevelt American Heritage Center is proud to reprint a selection of FDR’s vision for the security and economic liberty of the American people in war and peace.
The second reason I want to share this is that we’re coming close to President Obama’s third State of the Union Address. It is scheduled for January 25th. My guess is that FDR’s Second Bill of Rights and the vision he elucidated will officially die on that day. I am not expecting any thing close to the utterance of ‘Necessitous men are not free men’ or “People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made”.
Despite the obvious parallels between right now and the Great Depression–the high unemployment rates, the incredible number of foreclosures, and the breadth of necessitous men and women and children–I’m expectting many of the vestiges of FDR’s vision that prevent future calamities to be assaulted during Obama’s third State of the Union Address. Look closely at the list I put up top because so much of what was handed us has been trickling away.
As Norman Robinson contemplated via tweet, do we really value what we have today? Will we witness the destruction of what was handed to us and hand our children and grandchildren broken infrastructure, no hope for upward mobility, and useless institutions drained of funds by the greedy? Will any shell of what was envisioned for us in both the first bill of rights and the second remain? Frankly, I am expecting an ‘austerity’ speech that endorses the findings of the cat food commission. I also expect we will hear nothing of overreaching intrusion by the Patriot Act into our internet and cell phones. We are expected to diligently watch Football and bail out billionaires while everything else trickles up and away.
The Sky Dancing banner headline uses a snippet from a work by artist Tashi Mannox called 'Rainbow Study'. The work is described as a" study of typical Tibetan rainbow clouds, that feature in Thanka painting, temple decoration and silk brocades". dakinikat was immediately drawn to the image when trying to find stylized Tibetan Clouds to represent Sky Dancing. It is probably because Tashi's practice is similar to her own. His updated take on the clouds that fill the collection of traditional thankas is quite special.
You can find his work at his website by clicking on his logo below. He is also a calligraphy artist that uses important vajrayana syllables. We encourage you to visit his on line studio.
Recent Comments