Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard.
|
|||||
|
“The moral and political track record of modernist artists is nothing to be proud of. Some were despicable in the conduct of their personal lives, and many embraced facism or Stalinism. The modernist composer Karlheinz Stockhausen described the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks as “the greatest work of art imaginable for the whole cosmos”, and added, enviously, that “artists, too, sometimes go beyond the limits of what is feasible and conceivable, so that we wake up, and that we open ourselves to another world.” Nor is the theory of postmodernism especially progressive. A denial of objective reality is no friend to moral progress, because it prevents one from saying, for example, that slavery or the Holocaust really took place.” – Steven Pinker, The Blank Slate, page 416. September 30th, 2006 | 16 comments - (Comments are closed)
 Over at the Vololkh Conspiracy group blog of writers on legal issues, there is this interesting posting:
However, the author is not all that convinced that one could, or should lump whole generations of people together under a single category, assuming them to have common traits, whether they are parts of the ‘Greatest Generation’, ‘Baby Boomers’, the ‘Me-Generation’ or ‘Generation X’.
Pretty much my view, in fact. Yes, some of the current annoyance of my generation (I was born in May 1966, a rather good time for English soccer, not so good for our economic dynamism) at the Baby Boomers stems from a perception that those born after WW2 enjoyed a relatively cushy deal, not least in the form of things like final-salary pensions. The younger generations, caught up in the demographic changes caused by aeging and longer lifespans, may feel that older people have had it easy. But I think this can be overstated somewhat. Sometimes, when I hear of a certain kind of commenter waxing indignant about Babyboomers, one is struck by the bitter edge, and a sort of peeved dislike at having missed out on a permanent party. September 28th, 2006 | 23 comments - (Comments are closed)
Introducing the world’s grooviest washing machine. Mind you, ironing is still going to be a chore. (Hat-tip: Gizmondo). September 28th, 2006 | 9 comments - (Comments are closed)
Jeff Cooper, the man many people will associate with the modern art of guncraft in the United States, has died at the venerable age of 86. Anyone who has learned to shoot a handgun, rifle or shotgun to a high standard is likely, certainly in the United States, to have heard about this man, about the disciplines and standards he laid down. A few years ago I spent four gruelling but extremely enjoyable days at the Front Sight course in Nevada and there is no doubt that such places of learning took much of their inspiration from people like Jeff Cooper. A fine man, and a life well led. September 27th, 2006 | 16 comments - (Comments are closed)
Great respect is due to Cato’s Radley Balko, who has tirelessly campaigned against the the ‘no-knock’ search and entry powers employed by law enforcement agencies in the United States. I was surfing around the blogs and came across this story a few days after it broke. This is a glimmer, a start in what hopefully may be a change in the law. Radley’s work on the Cory Maye case is a bit of a result for blogs, too. This is a US issue, but as we know with stuff like eminent domain, it is always worth we Brits watching developments like this for signs of similar trends closer to home. Jim Henley has related thoughts on the issue. September 26th, 2006 | 12 comments - (Comments are closed)
This seems like a good idea
Yes, I know that we free market purists might argue as to why we need a big regulator like Britain’s FSA to set this up, but even in the absence of such a body, smart businesses would be looking to stress-test their systems against a potential serious problem like avian flu. And it is serious. Naysayers may jest about how much effort was expended on the Y2K technology issue (remember that?) but I am encouraged that these sorts of issues are taken seriously. The health of the London-centred financial system is critical, not just to the British economy, but to the wider trading system as well. Tyler Cowen, hardly a scaremonger, has thoughts about possible preparations that should be taken. September 26th, 2006 | 7 comments - (Comments are closed)
There is a military coup in Thailand, a crazed leader of Iran denying the Holocaust and prattling about the return of the “12 Iman”; a Venezuelan demogague brandishes the work of terrorist sympathiser Noam Chomsky; there are riots in the streets of Hungary, a major hedge fund loses billions in the gas market. What do the world’s economic markets do in response to all this? Well, as historian Niall Ferguson notes, they do remarkably little:
He goes on to argue:
So it would seem. September 24th, 2006 | 49 comments - (Comments are closed)
I wish these guys all the very best of luck in breaking the lock of the mainstream media on broadcast television in Britain and political coverage in particular. I am not sure if this outfit is going to feature a lot in my viewing habits, though. Given that I have to look at current affairs news quite a bit as part of my day job in London’s financial centre, I actually deliberately avoid too much of the same when I get home, preferring to read a book, go to the gym, see a movie or just hang out with my lovely wife. But for the political trainspotters out there, this sort of venture should be a boon. My only carp at this stage is why choose such a dull name? Maybe there is some sort of perverse appeal about it. September 23rd, 2006 | 8 comments - (Comments are closed)
There is a long and detailed report in the London Times today about the scale of gangland and police violence in Brazil’s Sao Paulo. If ever there was an account ramming home the distance between the image of Brazil as a fun-loving, sun-soaked nation and a country of enormous social and economic problems, this surely is it. Brazil is one of those country’s that I would love to visit some day (I am a bit of a nut about Brazilian music). But stuff like this does not exactly get me rushing to get on the aircraft. September 23rd, 2006 | 11 comments - (Comments are closed)
A movie based around the death of Princess Diana and focussing on how Queen Elizabeth II dealt with the whole sorry business is not something that yours truly would expect to see, to be honest. However, having read so many rave reviews about Helen Mirren’s performance as the British monarch, I gave in and went to see it tonight. Definitely worth a look, is my verdict. Mirren is brilliant, uncannily believable. (Better get that Oscar speech ready, Helen). This film is surprising in a number of ways. The Queen comes across as a sympathetic character, bound up in a sense of duty that puts her at odds with the manic celebrity culture that developed around Diana. You sense, as the film goes on, that the qualities that have stood this lady in good stead for most of her life will ultimately prove more valuable than the meritricious arts of media manipulation and spin that have become associated with the court of Tony Blair. Oddly, I will admit that the portrayal of Tony Blair surprised me by showing that this man, whom most Samizdata writers will regard with fair levels of loathing, comes across fairly well: someone who realised that the Queen was being bullied by an almost-deranged media and part of the British public. The guy playing spin-doctor-in-chief, Alastair Campbell, was also very good, showing that Campbell was, and is, one of the most malevolent persons to have held power in British life for many years, admittedly quite a feat. I have fairly mixed views about monarchy. I suppose, given my brand of post-Enlightenment liberalism, that I should take a dim view of this institution and its representation of hereditary power, but one has to recognise that if we are to have a head of state at all, then there are distinct advantages if that head is a person who is not elected and hence a necessarily controversial figure but someone who gets the job through the lottery of birth and is restricted by checks and balances of a constitution. (There is a case for arguing why we need a head of state at all. The Swiss seem to have a sort of revolving mayoral system, which works fine). This film may not persuade people on either sides of the argument on the case for or against constitutional monarchy, but it is a thought-provoking film and also has the merit of being relatively short. September 19th, 2006 | 15 comments - (Comments are closed)
Interesting article here on what might be in store for Cuba as and when Fidel Castro finally dies. My hope, probably naive, is that that country finally gets a break and enjoys the fruits of free enterprise. One thing that makes me annoyed is whenever I hear of affluent Western travellers go on about how they dream of going to Cuba before it “gets spoiled by U.S.-led development”. Yes, I am sure all those crumbling houses in Hanava, all those ancient 1950s cars and cute old guys with no teeth look so, you know, authentic in contrast to the frightfully ghastly prosperity of Miami or for that matter, Hong Kong. Like a good friend of mine, I am only going to Cuba when or if it becomes a shameless hotbet of capitalist vigour and not one minute before. September 18th, 2006 | 16 comments - (Comments are closed)
|
   |
||||
All content on this website (including text, photographs, audio files, and any other original works), unless otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons License. |
|||||