Paul Krugman Like a Father to Me

Blitzer

2010-03-05T15:22:00.001-08:00

Let's practice Blitzer-style journalism - Wolf Blitzer: Pedophile? http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/03/04/blitzer/index.html

Philosophy

2010-02-07T21:01:00.000-08:00

"The only way I know of pointing to a better way in philosophy is to engage in a certain kind of reading, a reading of the work of some philosophers who, in spite of their mistakes and their flaws--and what philosopher does not make mistakes and have flaws?--point the way toward and exemplify the possibility of philosophical reflection on our lives and language that is neither frivolously sceptical nor absurdly metaphysical, neither fantastic parascience nor fantastic parapolitics, but serious and fundamentally honest reflection of the most difficult kind."

-Renewing Philosophy, Hilary Putnam

FUCK BERNANKE, KRUGMAN TO THE FED!

2010-01-23T18:35:00.000-08:00

Spread the word!

via Atrios.

Gender Equality on the March

2010-01-23T10:34:00.000-08:00

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/24/fashion/24marriage.html?hp

Thus Spake Beardy

2010-01-10T11:49:00.001-08:00

Love the piling on.

ZOMG EURABIA

2010-01-08T15:23:00.001-08:00

Fact-free fear-mongering fun!

New Republic Smack Down

2010-01-06T20:46:00.000-08:00

Jonathan Chait makes Jim Manzi his son.

The Aughts

2009-12-28T12:11:00.001-08:00

The Aughts were the time of the awakening of my political consciousness. And they were a complete waste.

Arbeit Macht Frei

2009-12-24T17:17:00.001-08:00

Here.

Glenn Greenwald

2009-12-18T11:51:00.001-08:00

Says everything that needs to be said about healthcare reform.

Greenwald and Taibbi

2009-12-13T17:32:00.000-08:00

Glenn Greenwald and Matt Taibbi are the best journalists we have.

In Which Douchehat Buries the Lede...

2009-11-30T18:10:00.000-08:00

...so he can make shit up instead.

"The silver lining for liberals, though, is that this rightward turn hasn’t touched younger voters yet. With 18- to 29-year-olds, Democratic identification remains high, and Obama’s approval ratings are still up over 60 percent."

Methinks that might have some implications for his thesis in this op-ed. And I think it is more than a "silver-lining."

Dueling Posts on Geithner

2009-11-20T13:42:00.000-08:00

Big Daddy Beardy slaps D Brooks like a bitch. Yes, that's right. I am purposefully prejudicing you in favor of Our Glorious Leader. Deal with it.

Douchehat

2009-11-20T12:48:00.001-08:00

is a much better blogger than he is an editorialist. That is all.

Trenchant Commentary on Right Wing Hyperventilators

2009-11-16T19:17:00.000-08:00

Here.

Barthes and Philosophy

2009-11-13T20:58:00.000-08:00

"In a late interview (1978) he said that if he had to define himself it would be as a ‘philosopher’, adding ‘which does not refer to a degree of competence, because I have had no philosophical training. What I do is philosophise, reflect on my experience. This reflection is a joy and a benefit to me, and when I’m unable to pursue this activity, I become unhappy.’ This sounds a little feeble, and perhaps only a writer with a strong anti-bourgeois career behind him could afford to be so bourgeois. But the claim is interesting if we take it seriously rather than feebly, and of course by ‘reflection’ he doesn’t just mean musing on the meaning of life. A stronger version of the same proposition appears in Camera Lucida, where Barthes says he has always wanted to argue for or argue with his moods (‘J’ai toujours eu envie d’argumenter mes humeurs’), not in order to justify them, and still less to fill the text with his own individuality but to use this individuality as part of a formal study of the subject (‘une science du sujet’). Barthes is saying, I take it, that he has always wanted to convert his moods into arguments, or find the arguments underlying them or stemming from them. It’s a classic theoretical, intellectual enterprise; but it starts in the subjectivity that most theories just don’t know what to do with. It’s the place where the two Roland Barthes meet: the objective social scientist who was always a bit subjective turns out to be the same person as the subjective writer who likes to think theoretically about things."

Huh?!

2009-11-04T10:08:00.000-08:00

So let me get this straight: an unpopular Democratic governor, who not a few months ago was down double digits to his challenger, is barely defeated by his Republican opponent in the middle of the worst economic disaster since the Great Depression, and an uninspiring Democrat loses in Virginia. Meanwhile, the wing nuts' chosen savior loses a solidly conservative congressional district to a Democrat...this is bad news for Obama and the Democratic Party how? This shows the resurgence of the Republicans how?

How does this not show a party in disarray? What am I missing?

Levitt Pwned

2009-10-31T14:02:00.001-07:00

By an actual climate scientist at his own university.

I'm glad I decided not to write about this

2009-10-26T20:03:00.001-07:00

Glenn Greenwald makes Douchehat his son.

The Mind Boggles

2009-10-26T19:48:00.001-07:00

Why hasn't every single neo-con been executed for extreme perfidy and mendacity?

Hilarious

2009-10-26T18:29:00.000-07:00

Chamber of Commerce tells kids to get off its lawn. Way to stay relevant.

Will I be able to say this?

2009-10-25T22:46:00.000-07:00

"I have toiled for half a century and allowed myself no rest, but have continually striven and sought and worked as well and as hard as I could."

-Goethe

This is really not much better than AIPAC...

2009-10-23T17:09:00.000-07:00

Read the whole thing. Especially the weird tribalism/intermarriage conversation.

Truly Unhinged

2009-10-22T17:14:00.001-07:00

Here.

Jonah Goldberg Hasn't Read A Single Word of Heidegger

2009-10-22T16:43:00.000-07:00

I will bet you anything. (h/t Andrew Sullivan, who titles his post "Poseur Alert." Classic.)

A Challenge to Progressives

2009-10-22T16:11:00.000-07:00

Taibbi.

The Car Has Crashed, the Wheels Have Flown Off and Killed Innocent Bystanders, and the Driver is Currently Roasting in Hell-like Flames

2009-10-22T15:39:00.000-07:00

Make it stop.

Denounce Your Own Radical Fringe

2009-10-21T20:07:00.001-07:00

Consider them denounce d, with my second.

I would encourage you to denounce them as well.

Buchanan

2009-10-21T20:05:00.001-07:00

"I'd love to just leave this post with snark, but I have to say one last thing. Black Americans have shed blood in every American war since the Revolution. This country, even the very Capitol building in which today's legislators now demand to see the birth certificate of the first black president, was built on the sweat and sinew of slaves. Before we were people in the eyes of the law, before we had the right to vote, before we had a black president, we were here, helping make this country as it is today. We are as American as it gets. And frankly, the time of people who think otherwise is passing. If that's the country Buchanan wants to hold onto, well, he's right, he is losing it."

Fucking Coward

2009-10-21T19:40:00.000-07:00

So willing to talk tough about sending people to die for no good reason, but scared of a little ol' lesbian?

Because critical thinking is hard...

2009-10-21T17:53:00.001-07:00

...false equivalencies get made all the time.

Markets

2009-10-21T15:39:00.001-07:00

Conservatives and free-traders only trust what the market says when it suits them. When it doesn't, they appeal to old-style Puritan moralism.

Good Lord

2009-10-21T15:37:00.001-07:00

Thomas Friedman establishing a tenuous connection between two obviously not related events? That never happens!

Libertarians

2009-10-21T15:31:00.001-07:00

The next time a libertarian accuses me of being a pie-in-the-sky liberal, I'm going to punch him in the mouth.

Liberal Hawks vs. Neoconservatives

2009-10-20T15:02:00.001-07:00

Our warmongering is better than yours.

Right Wing Derangement Syndrome

2009-10-19T12:26:00.001-07:00

Unfortunately, while the radical right-wing holds little appeal to most voters, it's probably true that the left-wing doesn't either.

Words from on High

2009-10-19T12:05:00.000-07:00

Here.

Income Inequality

2009-10-19T11:09:00.000-07:00

Read it and weep.

Teacher's Unions

2009-10-16T15:04:00.001-07:00

Isn't there something disgusting and reprehensible about attacking teachers, the most egregiously underpaid and under-appreciated, yet essential, profession?

Fom Triedman

2009-10-14T15:01:00.000-07:00

Tom Friedman has been head cheerleader for two of the most destructive phenomena of the last 20 years: neo-liberal free trade and neo-conservative foreign policy. People complain about tenured professors being immune from accountability. What about our tenured opinion makers?

Taibbi Nobel Smackdown

2009-10-13T20:22:00.000-07:00

But he refuses to play by the rule of the game.

Anarchism

2009-10-13T20:17:00.001-07:00

Red is better than black.

Oh wow...this is truly vicious

2009-10-13T19:50:00.001-07:00

That's why I like it.

(h/t Brad Delong)

Oldie, but Goody

2009-10-13T19:34:00.000-07:00

Mark Thoma on bogus arguments about the burden of debt.

Frank Rich does it again

2009-10-11T11:25:00.000-07:00

Here. Of course, the real problem is that you have to be Tough and In Favor of War in order to be taken seriously. If you question the efficacy of our military to accomplish the kinds of things we expect of them in Afghanistan and Iraq, you are clearly an America hating socialist-fascist-communist-nazi, and Unserious. Shrill, even.

This is about the same URL i talked about in my last post...

2009-10-10T17:01:00.001-07:00

..but goddamn, could this be a more accurate diagnosis of Andrew Sullivan: "But Andrew Sullivan, who is one of the most infuriatingly variable bloggers in the quality of his bullshit detector..."

The Bell Curve and Betsy McCaughey, anyone?

Words to live by

2009-10-10T16:56:00.000-07:00

"I very rarely read Megan McArdle. She gets filtered by the 'life is too short to read stupid people' mesh."

I just wish I could follow my own advice more often.

I also want to point out that business school is a joke, and not where someone goes who wants to be serious about understanding an academic discipline.

Dear Blog

2009-10-10T16:30:00.001-07:00

Today is Dear Blog day. Enjoy our attention.

Dear Economists

2009-10-10T16:29:00.001-07:00

You suck at everything. From Sir J. Bradford DeLong, Earl of Shrill.

Dear Academic Philosophy

2009-10-10T15:47:00.001-07:00

You suck.

Love,

Spectre

Thomas Kuhn

2009-10-05T19:56:00.000-07:00

Definitely my favorite philosopher of science. In fact, when I started graduate school in philosophy, I thought I might like to do philosophy of science. Unfortunately, as this post points out, Kuhn hasn't had much success in the philosophy of science, and philosophers of science are not all that interested in pursuing a research program inspired by him.

It takes a Village

2009-10-03T22:38:00.000-07:00

To cause mass amnesia. (h/t Atrios)

Chicago, Please...

2009-09-27T21:48:00.001-07:00

Make it stop.

Iran

2009-09-27T21:43:00.000-07:00

Here.

I am so embarrassed for the University of Chicago

2009-09-24T23:40:00.000-07:00

When will it end?

WTF

2009-09-17T11:07:00.000-07:00

"Like many much-conquered countries, not least Italy, Iran loves artifice, the dressing-up of truth in elaborate layers. It will always favor ambiguity over clarity."

What does that even mean?!

Cohen.

Thursday Deutsch Blogging

2009-09-16T23:20:00.001-07:00

Ergreifen Realität mit beiden Händen.

Das ist alles.

Wilson and King

2009-09-15T15:27:00.001-07:00

It is the sign of a diseased political culture when people like Peter King, Joe Wilson, and all their wild-eyed brethren are given a public platform. I keep waiting for the American people to realize how reckless and dangerous the Republican's and their allies in the news media are. It really looks like there is nothing you can say, no lie you can pass along, no calumny you can spit, that will get you banned from official discourse. Democracy and freedom of expression cannot work unless those who lie, who demagogue, who deceive, are punished for their deceit. Liars and rabble-rousers are rewarded for their efforts, because people enjoy the drama, and drama drives the ratings and fills the coffers of the corporate entities that run our media outlets.

Protecting freedom of speech means not just guarding against censorship; it also means responding vigorously to those who would seek to undermine freedom of speech by divorcing it from intellectual honesty and good reasoning.

For the love of God

2009-09-12T20:46:00.000-07:00

Stop quoting William Butler Yeats's "Second Coming."

Social Insurance

2009-09-12T15:50:00.001-07:00

Here.

(h/t Mark Thoma)

Read Read Read Read

2009-09-06T21:45:00.000-07:00

And then read some more. I'm going to have to change the name of the blog if all my posts keep coming from DeLong, like this one.

Striking Clarity

2009-09-06T21:13:00.000-07:00

Here.

(h/t Brad DeLong)

Read Newspapers to Learn Clarity of Exposition?

2009-09-06T18:57:00.001-07:00

This person has obviously not had much experience with the state of our newspapers.

Making Something One's Own

2009-09-06T14:49:00.000-07:00

In philosophy, there is a curious problem that occurs when one encounters an argument whose conclusion one does not like, but one nonetheless cannot seem to defeat. One is presented with a dilemma: Do I accept the results of this argument, or do I reject them? The curious problem that results is that people often refuse to accept the argument, even with no apparently good reason to do so. Let me explain this scenario a little further, for those who are not familiar with the way argument works in philosophy (it actually works this way in all disciplines, but it is not often as explicitly laid out as it almost always is in an academic philosophy setting). Philosophers are very proud of their mastery of logic, the discipline that investigates valid argument and reasoning, and are likely to appeal to two facts about logic when presenting or critiquing an argument: (1) There are two ways you can defeat an argument: a) you can question the validity of the form of the argument, or b) you can question the truth of one or more of the premises; (2) If you cannot do either of the things mentioned in (1), then you must accept the conclusion of the argument (I am tempted to use "ought," instead of "must," to demonstrate the normative aspect of the rationality criterion. However, I imagine for most readers the difference will be elided, so I won't bother. But keep in mind that the sense in which one "must" accept the conclusion of an argument is more of a moral duty than an example of strict causal necessity. This will be important later.). Let's call (1) Logic 101 and (2) the Criterion of Rationality.

Logic 101 is basically accepted by everyone. If you can show that an argument doesn't have a valid argument form (i.e. Modus Ponens, Modus Tollens, among other classics), then you don't have to take the argument seriously. Additionally, if you can reasonably object to the truth of one or more of the premises, you have additional reason to reject the argument. There does not seem to be much room to argue with the principles of Logic 101.

(2), the Criterion of Rationality, is additionally almost universally accepted. However, I think it is far more questionable. I should perhaps attenuate my statement that it is universally accepted. In Anglo-American Analytic philosophy, there is almost no controversy as to the truth of the Criterion of Rationality (Those in other disciplines and/or styles of philosophy might not be so willing to embrace this idea.). Let's think, first of all, about what a logically valid argument entails. For a argument to be logically valid, it must be the case that if the premises are true, it is not possible for the conclusion to be false. The truth of the premises guarantees the truth of the conclusion. Notice that nothing in here says anything about accepting the results of such an argument. Most philosophers take the implication of this fact about logically valid arguments to say that one must accept the results of a sound argument (a sound argument is an argument that has a valid argument form, and all true premises). But does this follow?

It certainly seems crazy to deny it, or at least irrational. Indeed, this is often how philosophers explain what is going on when someone is presented with an indefeasibly sound argument, yet they refuse to accept the consequences of said argument. The person in this situation is behaving irrationally.

But are they? While I don't have a fully developed response to this claim, it seems to me that there is a sense in which one must own an argument before it can reach that level of acceptance. One cannot be compelled purely by the formal majesty of logic, and it seems incorrect to accuse those not so compelled of "irrationality." There is something deeply rational, in its positive normative sense, in delaying judgment, even in the face of such apparently inescapable evidence. The type of acceptance the philosopher thinks logical argument imposes is supposed to be relatively simple, the acceptance of a proposition. Before you heard this argument, you believed that p; now you believe that not-p. Or maybe you had a void which p now fills. Sounds straightforward enough, right? This is a ludicrous symbolization of how beliefs work, however. Our beliefs are not atomistic in this sense, unattached to other beliefs (this is controversial in philosophy, but let's just go with it for now). To borrow a phrase from Quine, they exist in an interlocking web with all our other beliefs (I have some qualms about belief talk, but it's really not worth making this any more complicated than it already is, so let's just press onward.). A change in belief is a traumatic episode, especially if one's belief is central in one's web of beliefs. Is it really "rational" to rip apart one's web of beliefs in the face of such uncompelling evidence as a sound argument? Doesn't the conclusion have to seize one in a manner more meaningful that the inexorability of logical necessity? Philosophers need to think about this problem far more seriously than they have to date, and not just accuse those who fall prey to it of irrationality. It is far more pervasive and important as a phenomenon, I think, than has been heretofore acknowledged.

I will stop at this point, having taken this as far as I can at the moment. For those who care, I was inspired by an essay by James Conant in this collection entitled "Nietzsche's Perfectionism: A Reading of Schopenhauer as Educator." While not explicitly about this problem, I think Nietzsche's idea of "becoming what one is" as a centrally moral concept, a becoming that occurs only with extreme difficulty, and after much denial of what one is, is a useful place to begin illuminating the question of why it is that "logic" is not enough for rationality. Or maybe rationality isn't enough for being human?

UPDATE: I just wanted to include a quotation from Heinrich von Kleist, who Nietzsche approvingly cites in Schopenhauer as Educator: "Not long ago I became acquainted with the Kantian philosophy...I have no reason to fear it will shatter you so profoundly and painfully as it has me...If the point of this thought does not penetrate your heart, do not smile at one who feels wounded by it in the deepest and most sacred part of his being."

Koan II

2009-09-06T14:09:00.001-07:00

"The education of a scholar is an extremely difficult problem, if his humanity is not to be sacrificed in the process."

--Friedrich Nietzsche, Schopenhauer as Educator

Koan

2009-09-05T23:39:00.000-07:00

"One can only become a philosopher, not be one. As soon as one thinks one is a philosopher, one stops becoming one."

--Friedrich Schlegel, Athenaeum Fragments

I have an idea

2009-09-04T16:06:00.000-07:00

How about pointing out how insane these people are? How about not just uncritically repeating every crazy thing they say? Urging kids to stay in school and study hard? Since when is working hard socialism? The danger in this speech is clearly the possible formation of an Obamajugend, trained to spy on their parents and share their crayons with other kids. Oh, the horror!

This is why I study philosophy

2009-09-02T19:56:00.001-07:00

"These definitions coincide with the terms which, since Greek antiquity, have been used to define the forms of government as the rule of man over man—of one or the few in monarchy and oligarchy, of the best or the many in aristocracy and democracy, to which today we ought to add the latest and perhaps most formidable form of such dominion, bureaucracy, or the rule by an intricate system of bureaux in which no men, neither one nor the best, neither the few nor the many, can be held responsible, and which could be properly called the rule by Nobody. Indeed, if we identify tyranny as the government that is not held to give account of itself, rule by Nobody is clearly the most tyrannical of all, since there is no one left who could even be asked to answer for what is being done. It is this state of affairs which is among the most potent causes for the current world-wide rebellious unrest."

(h/t Glenn Greenwald)

Wingnut Welfare

2009-08-30T19:22:00.001-07:00

This is really intemperate and mean. Which is why I like it.

(h/t DeLong)

Someone Call Harold Bloom!

2009-08-30T10:05:00.000-07:00

I predict a crotchety reaction to this in 3...2....1....

Trolls of the Econo-blogosphere

2009-08-29T13:34:00.000-07:00

Trolls are usually those who disrupt a particular blog or message board, intentionally or unintentionally. Greg Mankiw is an econo-blogosphere troll. He disrupts the workings of the econo-blogosphere as a whole with his insipid posts. Eventually, Brad DeLong gets tired of the stupid, and fires off a nasty blog post. But it's really kind of a waste of time. Mankiw has sacrificed any semblance of credibility at this point, and should be ignored. I understand how those who respond to Mankiw, McArdle, and others of that ilk feel. Their intellectual dishonesty is infuriating. But acknowledging them is just feeding the fire. At some point, the only thing you can do is ignore them.

Austrians Get Schooled

2009-08-29T13:27:00.001-07:00

Not that they'd acknowledge it.

Anonymous Liberal

2009-08-25T19:34:00.001-07:00

Like a crucifix to stupid (kryptonite jokes are so played out at this point, so I'm trying out a vampire one).

HEY OBAMA! SHOW US YOUR PACKAGE!

2009-08-25T19:27:00.000-07:00

In the name of God, what the hell is wrong with the level of nitwittery in this country? I have a question: has anyone on the left ever been as hysterical and hyperbolic as this? Can we start colonizing other planets soon, so I can leave this madhouse?

CIA

2009-08-25T15:41:00.000-07:00

I want to have this somewhere I ~~could~~ can always find it.

Glenzilla, don't hurt 'em

2009-08-23T17:17:00.001-07:00

I am so depressed after having read this. Torch the Wapo, torch Time, torch The New York Times. The whole lot of them are irredeemable. I think a great idea for a magazine or enterprising "journalist" would be to gather up all the facts about various media figures who have been nothing but wrong over the last decade or so, and collect it all into one place. My ideal figure for this would be either Glenn Greenwald or Matt Taibbi, but they are probably considered too fringe. It would be like the de-Nazification of Germany after World War II, except for journalists. We probably shouldn't execute any of them, but you never know what can happen with all these slippery slopes lying around.

I want to make myself feel better, so I will give you the DeLongian sign-off: That is all.

Healthcare

2009-08-23T16:30:00.001-07:00

I must have seen this posted on at least a half dozen blogs, but it's well worth passing along again.

Light blogging...

2009-08-22T20:44:00.000-07:00

...for the next week or so probably. I am starting a teaching gig at a local community college, and most of my time and intellectual attention has gone, and will go, towards preparing for that.

Crime

2009-08-22T20:37:00.000-07:00

Look, I know every politician wants to swagger around like his testicles resemble basketballs more than the tiny white ones slapped back and forth on a green table, six shooters at his side and 10 gallon hat atop his head, but the fact is that the cowboy mentality is not only bad foreign policy, it's also bad social policy. The temptation to punish people harshly for their transgressions is probably as close as we can get to "human nature;" you hurt me, I want to return the hurt, ten thousandfold. But, like fear, it's probably not a good emotion on which to decide how best to deal with crime and criminal recidivism.

I must be insane

2009-08-20T21:43:00.000-07:00

The first commenter to this post at Matthew Yglesias wonders where Joe Biden is. And the sad thing is, I think I might agree with him!

Pointy-headed Academics

2009-08-20T21:40:00.000-07:00

In preparation for teaching a class on religion, I've been reading a lot about shamans and primitive religion. For some reason, I think their methods of persuasion looked much like this. Also, hooray for the Frankfurt School!

(h/t Brad DeLong)

Do NOT make Brad DeLong angry

2009-08-19T23:06:00.000-07:00

You won't like him when he's angry.

It never fails

2009-08-19T21:51:00.000-07:00

If you die, all your faults are forgiven. I'm not going to pretend Robert Novak was a great guy. Sorry.

UPDATE: Seems we have agreement from Molly Ivors.

Mark Thoma

2009-08-19T21:27:00.000-07:00

It is a bad sign when the normally unflappable proprietor of Economist's View is showing signs of despair. The mendacious fear-mongers obviously share a significant measure of blame, but the kow-towing of the mainstream press to the right-wing fear machine is, at this point, nothing less than dereliction of duty. The press is composed of overpaid men and women with expensive haircuts who, for all I can tell, care more about their own celebrity and ratings than performing their function. The story of how the right has "worked the refs" by their denunciations and complaints, until all that is acceptable in a news piece is what-the-Democrat-said vs. what-the-Republican-said, regardless of veracity, is a story that has already been well told by others, so I won't repeat it. But it certainly makes one reconsider the hand-wringing over the financial problems of the print news. If all reporters will do is write down what people say and print it, isn't that worse than nothing? If you can lie with imputiny, and have your views show up in a national setting, isn't that something to decry?

Krugman's Law

2009-08-18T13:19:00.000-07:00

This being a blog cheekily dedicated to my idol "Beardy" (as he was called on The Colbert Report), it is necessary for us to keep our readers up to date on the latest in the articulation of his Theory. Barry Schwartz, who I discovered via Brad DeLong, has the latest confirming evidence of Krugman's Law.

UPDATE: Also, welcome to any readers who reached us via Grasping Reality with Both Hands, which I've always thought of as a violent metaphor, bringing to mind the image of an enraged Brad DeLong grasping reality between his hands and throttling it, similarly to how he appeared when he debated this guy.

Can a Film Critic be too Contrarian?

2009-08-18T11:41:00.000-07:00

Whenever I read a headline on Slate like this, I always translate it in my mind into: "Can a Film Critic be too Awesome?"

Time to Monetize this Bitch!

2009-08-18T10:46:00.001-07:00

Just kidding. Welcome, Crooks and Liars readers.

Ross Douthat

2009-08-17T13:38:00.000-07:00

Look, I don't agree with some of the details of what Douthat is saying in his new op-ed, and I think he is downplaying the serious contradictions inherent in the Republicans position, contradictions that no intellectually honest person could hold. But politicians are not in the business of coherence, they are in the business of winning. So maybe you can only make so much hay of that complaint. At any rate, I feel that, since I am normally critical of Douthat, I should be willing to praise him when he deserves it, and this is one of those times. It is well worth reading.

I've heard it said that it might have been a mistake to give seniors Medicare back in the 60s, because those of us in favor of universal healthcare robbed our cause of (1) the most consistent voting block in the country, and (2) a voting block that has the most to gain from healthcare coverage provided by the government. Whatever the truth of that is, it certainly does seem that there is an effective anti-reform strategy involved in scaring seniors, and Douthat is right to point that out.

Ladies and Gentlemen

2009-08-16T13:47:00.000-07:00

Thomas Friedman!

"If you travel long enough and far enough — like by jet to Johannesburg, by prop plane to northern Botswana and then by bush plane deep into the Okavango Delta — you can still find it. It is that special place that on medieval maps would have been shaded black and labeled: “Here there be Dragons!” But in the postmodern age, it is the place where my BlackBerry, my wireless laptop and even my satellite phone all gave me the same message: “No Service.”

Exotic byline? Check. Technological hat-tip? Check. Reference to "post-modern?" Check. Take her off to Ed, doll, I'm catchin' a steamer to Zanzibar. Where's my pith helmet?!

Short Thoughts on Perlstein

2009-08-16T13:31:00.000-07:00

A fundamental blinkeredness about what actually constitutes the erosion of personal rights has always been a hallmark of the fringe right. The current crop of right-wingers that cheered the Patriot Act but treat the readjustment of health care incentives as a grave abrogation of fundamental liberties see the world in the same way that anti-communists in the '60s did, when domestic spying and the Vietnam War were necessary inconveniences. And this is to say nothing about corporate power, which in the conservative mind does not operate in a way that implicates private liberty.

While I appreciate Brad DeLong linking to this piece, and I agree that it's a mistake to assume that Cronkite-era journalism was much better, the implication in the final paragraphs that the scummy David Broder was worse than Walter Lippmann dismays me. Read your Drift and Mastery, DeLong!

http://tinyurl.com/mcjqc8

Pearlstein

2009-08-15T15:16:00.001-07:00

This is a different Pearlstein, but he also has good things to say. One wonders where this lunatic fringe was hiding during the Bush years, and why it is now that they are so afraid of the power of their government when they lived through one of the greatest expansions of executive power in modern American history. You barely heard a peep from them. All the militia groups that plagued the Clinton years, culminating in the Oklahoma City bombings? They're back, baby, and they're pissed.

Boycott Whole Foods

2009-08-15T15:06:00.001-07:00

That is all.

Best of the Best

2009-08-15T13:25:00.001-07:00

To the Editor:

One phrase used by more than a few people in the debate on health care reform is that “our health care system is the envy of the world.” Which world is that?

A recent Harris/Decima Poll in Canada, the country that probably knows our system the best, found a 10-to-1 majority who believe their system is better than ours. And Harris Polls in France and Britain found that most people there believe that their systems are “the envy of the world.”

Humphrey Taylor
Chairman, The Harris Poll
New York, Aug. 13, 2009

-from a New York Times Editorial

Reflections on the Blog's Direction

2009-08-15T13:11:00.000-07:00

Not too long ago we reached the 100 posts mark with the introduction of Chimera to PKLAFTM. To date, the focus of the blog has been to disseminate articles and blog posts that I have found interesting to a broader public (broader, not broad). In the future I hope to post more substantial compositions, similar to those musing on philosophy I have so far submitted. It's nice to be an aggregator a la Atrios, but I want to be a contributor, not just a distributor. Anyway, look out for more substantive commentary in the future from both the contributors to PKLAFTM.

Eastern European Nations

2009-08-15T13:03:00.000-07:00

Slovenia is way better than Slovakia. I'll take Ljubljana over Bratislava any day. Welcome, Chimera, to what I hope will be an increasing menagerie of fantastic creatures.

MY Current Philosophical Obsession

2009-08-15T00:05:00.001-07:00

Mark Kelman.

Preliminary Thoughts, By Way of Self-Introduction

2009-08-14T23:36:00.000-07:00

Many things gall me about this blog.

In my experience, it has never denounced the destruction of wild chinchilla populations in the Andes. It has never sought to combat the negative stereotypes about Slovakia perpetuated by the depiction of Bratislava in Eli Roth's "Hostel" films as a place of third-world savagery and sadotourism. My perusal of the archives has yielded no posts attacking or defending Jon Elster; relatedly, the links on the right side of the page are bereft of sociology blogs in favor of things like "Philosophy, et cetera," which smacks to me of a narcissistic disciplinary chauvinism that impedes the catholic wonderment that marks the best life has to offer.

But this blog, if you will permit me a cliche, is an oasis in the desert of our contemporary politics. It is a refuge where PKrug is rightly lauded for wielding his Nobel-burnished credibility like a Republican-smiting Mjöllnir, where Glenn Greenwald is forgiven for his bad Portuguese but hailed for his keen intellect, and where half the posts are short enough to be Tweets but I gobble them up anyway like Belgian candies made of unctuous marzipan wrapped around nougaty polemic. Frankly, it is a blog that cannot be ignored.

My plan is to abet the already high quality of the blog. Ultimately, the prestige of the PKLFM cenacle will make possible a guest appearance by PKrug himself on these digital pages.

It is to this end that I devote myself, as well as to the satiety of those readers extant and still to come.

Real Socialism

2009-08-14T15:49:00.000-07:00

Gotta love Lenin's Tomb:

"It's not just that the NHS outperforms the US on most health outcomes. What leaps out at one is the way in which class amplifies the differences. America's psychopathic healthcare system is sacrificing tens of thousands of lives, mainly working class and African American, for the sake of profit. Health advisors and boards of trustees routinely kill people, knowingly, to defend the bottom-line. Right now, those who are scaremongering about the NHS are lobbying vehemently to ensure that nothing about this vile state of affairs ever changes. They aren't stupid enough not to understand the consequences of what they are doing, but the current rate of death and misery is part of creating an optimal investment climate. This is social sadism. This is a humanitarian catastrophe. To remedy this intolerable state of affairs, I propose a lobby or solidarity group to 'Save America' (or 'Save America From Itself', or 'Stop Them Before They Kill Again' - you get the picture). There should be rock concerts in Hyde Park to raise money for the millions of Americans who have no healthcare. Bob Geldof and Bono - and here's the excellent thing - would be totally uninvolved in any of this. Funds should be available for those who have been told by their insurance companies that their life is less important than shareholder value, to pay for an airline ticket to any country where they can get treated properly. And all support should be given to those heroic freedom fighters taking on the inhuman monsters who have been getting away with killing their people for far too long. I bet negative PR like that would get some reforms going pretty fucking quickly."

I hope he's right

2009-08-14T15:23:00.000-07:00

"It's not surprising to me that Obama's poll numbers are going down. Part of that is most assuredly due to a GOP-fueled resurgence of the ugliest aspects of our national character -- nativism, racism, and know-nothingism -- within a population that it's hard to imagine were big Obama boosters in the first place. But I suspect the poll numbers are also reflecting a growing disillusionment among those who placed a lot of hope in an Obama presidency. Disillusionment that he's not standing up for what the people who voted for him stood up for in November."

-Dan Froomkin

Liberals have a touching attachment to the idea that the truth will win out, that a truth is so blindingly clear to people that they will accept it. As long as we get the truth out, we will win. Oh well, all ideologies have their blind-spots...

Death Squads

2009-08-14T14:27:00.001-07:00

"Maybe the answer is to scare people with the truth. Without health care reform that reduces the growth in costs, we won't be able to sustain the level of health care we are delivering now let alone cover those who don't have access to the care they need. Other countries have demonstrated conclusively that it's possible to deliver high quality universal care at a much lower cost than in the US, so a failure to implement reform is also a failure to maximize the availability of high quality health care. For that reason the people trying to block reform are -- to put it in their terms -- the death squads. They are the the the ones putting health care at risk, particularly care for those reliant upon government programs such as Medicare that will face budget pressures if costs aren't controlled, so lets hope the fabrications and other antics don't deter us from implementing the changes that are necessary to ensure that we can meet our health care needs."

-Mark Thoma