There are a lot of histrionics over Ukraine now, as Russia's invasion is complete. A couple of points to put the situation into perspective.
The Crimea, which is the focal point of Russian action, has long been a flashpoint. The Crimean War was fought by Russia on the pretext of saving Orthodox Christians. Famous for Florence Nightingale and the Charge of the Light Brigade, the Crimean War pitted Russia against an alliance composed of the Ottoman Empire, Britain, France and Sardinia. The war ran from 1853 to 1856.
After the Russian Revolution and the bloody Civil War that followed in which White Army fighters were massacred after they surrendered, the Crimea was made an autonomous republic and part of Russia. Stalin deported the indigenous Crimean Tatars in 1944 to central Asia for supposedly collaborating with the Nazis, along with Armenians, Bulgarians and Greeks.
In 1954 the Supreme Soviet transferred the Crimean Oblast (area) from the Russian Soviet Federated Socialist Republic (RSFSR) to the Ukrainian SSR. This was a symbolic gesture on the 300th anniversary of Ukraine becoming part of Russia. Ukraine is viewed the birthplace of Russia, Rurik's Kievan Rus'.
Today Russia's Black Sea fleet is based in Sevastopol. This warm-water port has long been coveted by Russia, with Peter the Great (Putin's idol) failing twice to seize it. In 2010 Russia extended its lease on the port with Ukraine until 2042. The population of Crimea is dominated by Russians, with many retired military officers living there, and many holding dual passports. It's warmer there, and a lot of regular Russians also retire there; if Sochi is the Russian Miami, the Crimea is the Russian version of the Florida panhandle.
With its own autonomous parliament, Crimea is for all intents and purposes a separate Russian enclave. Probably all the Russians in Crimea are in favor Russian troops coming in. They have swallowed Putin's line that western Ukraine is a puppet of Europe and America.
Putin's justification for acting in Crimea is the protection of Russian Christians. This plays into the historical context leading back for centuries. If he were to cite an American analog to justify his actions, he would point to Ronald Reagan's invasion of Grenada in 1983, when Reagan claimed that American students were in danger.
The recently deposed president of Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovich, is an authoritarian tyrant who was stealing the country blind. In addition to his gigantic mansion near Kiev, where reporters have found incredible opulence and many incriminating documents, he was building a huge palace on the Black Sea. Yanukovich has been "privatizing" state assets and selling them to himself, his family and his cronies.
Some of the people who tossed Yanukovich out are louts just like him, only they're Ukranian rather than Russian, and they're only slightly less corrupt. The people who were protesting in the streets aren't happy to see those clowns come into power, but then anyone is better than Putin.
Putin could well be biting off more than he can chew. He already has a problem with Muslim terrorists. Now he's antagonizing Ukranians, many of whom live in Russia. Russia's anti-gay laws are just one symptom of his increasing intolerance and arrogance. He seems to think he's the second coming of Peter the Great.
Given these facts, castigating President Obama for "doing nothing" is short-sighted. There's nothing to do, militarily. Crimea has been a Russian colony for a century, part of Ukraine in name only. There's absolutely no justification for us to take any kind of military action, if Crimea is the end.
However, if Russia moves on the rest of Ukraine, that's a different story. At that point it will become extremely serious. To prevent that, the international community needs to show the Russians that they aren't going to sit idly by. We have to hit the Russians where it hurts: the wallet.
Western governments should immediately put economic sanctions on Russian accounts, and not let up until Russia leaves Crimea. At the same time we should also act as guarantors for the safety of Russians in Crimea and affirm Russia's right to the Sevastopol lease.
Why are economic sanctions any kind of threat?
Since Putin's ascension, corrupt oligarchs who have profited by sweet-heart oil and gas contracts and "privatization" of state assets have been sending billions of dollars into western banks and offshore tax havens. They've bought hundreds of billions of dollars worth of real estate and businesses in London, Paris and New York. American and British bankers have been kowtowing to Russian tycoons for years; many New Yorkers have come to hate the rich Russians who have bought up apartments and condos and driven real estate prices into the stratosphere.
As much as two-thirds of the money leaving Russia is derived from criminal enterprises, by the Kremlin's own analysis. American hawks complain that economic sanctions are toothless against Iran and North Korea, but those countries have relatively weak ties to western economies. The Russian oligarchs have sunk all their ill-gotten gains in the west because they don't trust that Putin will let them keep it: if they look at him sideways he'll throw them into jail and take all their money -- which has already happened to a couple of tycoons who crossed him.
Western countries thus have the capability to destroy the oligarchs who prop up Putin. Instead of carping about what the president should do, American and British business communities should start applying some moral judgments about who they do business with.
Since two out of every three dollars coming out of Russia is from a criminal enterprise, American bankers with Russian customers have to know they're dealing with crooks. Now is the time for them to practice a little private sector foreign policy and and let regulatory agencies know of any suspicious activities they might have noticed.
If Putin's pals start hemorrhaging cash they may not be so sanguine about military adventures in Ukraine.
Monday, March 03, 2014
Sunday, March 02, 2014
Nominee For Best Picture: Gravity
Gravity is still the best film of the year. The images and story of one woman's struggle for survival still haunt me months after seeing it. Hands down, the performance of Sandra Bullock's career and that's saying a lot considering her tun in The Blind Side. And I am just a giant geek for space stuff!
I hope it wins tonight!!
Nominee For Best Picture: Nebraska
I found many familiar people and scenes in Alexander Payne's Nebraska. For those of us who live in the upper midwest, the sight of men staring blankly at a TV set and eventually falling asleep is commonplace. Bruce Dern is so fucking good as Woody, a man convinced he has won a publisher's sweepstakes prize of one million dollars.
Nominee For Best Picture: Philomena
Did the Catholic Church engage in slavery in Ireland in the 1950s? Yes they did and the results were devastating to single women who were simply exploring their sexuality. Phiolmena is both charming and sad as Judi Dench plays Phiolmena Lee (based on a real woman) searching for her son who was given up for adoption by evil nuns. It's worth it just to see Steve Coogan thunder away at a nun in wheelchair.
Nominee For Best Picture: Dallas Buyers Club
Dallas Buyer's Club should be the Tea Party pick of this year's nominees as it is most decidedly anti-government. But with good reason as the federal government's response to the AIDS epidemic in the early years (in particular, the FDA) was abominable. Matthew McConaughey and Jared Leto are brilliant.
Nominee For Best Picture: Wolf of Wall Street
I am the most open person about sex that I know and have no filter whatsoever between my mouth and brain when it comes to carnal matters. But I blushed several times when I saw Wolf of Wall Street. Leo's performance is exhausting to watch and after 3 hours, I felt as though I'd ran a marathon. He's my fave for Best Actor.
Nominee For Best Picture: American Hustle
I think David O. Russell has followed in the footsteps of Martin Scorsese and decided to make a career of telling right to the very core American stories. While American Hustle touches on the Abscam operation in the late 70s and early 80s, it's really a story about how desperate and fucked up we are as a nation. All of the actors in this film are simply outstanding!
Saturday, March 01, 2014
Nominee For Best Picture: Her
Can you be in love with someone who doesn't have a body? Can you have sex with them? If we create an artificial intelligence that evolves, have we become God? These are the questions I asked myself after I saw Her.
I don't have any clear answers as of yet.
Nominee For Best Picture: 12 Years A Slave
I found people's reaction to 12 Years A Slave to be both sad and amusing. They were shocked (!) at how awful slavery really was and couldn't believe that plantation owners were that harsh. The film certainly doesn't pull any punches but it's pretty much what I expected. How quickly people forget their own history...
Nominee For Best Picture: Captain Phillips
I enjoyed Captain Phillips a great deal and thought that Tom Hanks was great as he always is. The last 45 minutes of the film did an excellent job of capturing the tedium of hostage situations. But what was very wonderful about this film was how they showed the life of an average Somali near the coast and the near constant pressure they are under in their daily lives from barbarians. It was a very balanced film and not so pro-American hoo rah.
Looney Liberal Night
I love my really liberal friends but last night drove me absolutely bonkers. Hanging out in downtown Minneapolis for a birthday party for one of them, I was regaled with mouthfoaming about how all corporations are evil puppet masters who have hijacked Barack Obama's mind and soul, manipulating him into doing their nefarious bidding. Apparently, the Federal Reserve is behind it all.
Great.
After I took far more than I should, I posited that they don't sound any different than those moonbats on the far right and their evil government conspiracy theories. That made them very upset, offering several "Wow. Just wows" at my "naivete" at "how the world really works." One woman kept asking me over and over again if I knew just what the Federal Reserve really was. I replied that I did. When she asked for an explanation and I gave her one, she rolled her eyes and accused me of being "blind." Her boyfriend then described to me his theory that Barack Obama was taken aside after about a month in office and given his orders.
"Just look at the difference in his face after a few weeks in office. He went from young looking to ashen. Yeah, they told how it was."
"Who is they?" I asked.
"Ah, c'mon Mark, you know!!"
I still don't.
I tried to explain to them that I had been through all this in the 1990s, listening regularly to Art Bell and Coast to Coast. I still listen to it today but realize with the wisdom of my years that most of this stuff is just fictional garbage. More frustrating is the sad fact that people on the Right view all liberals as being this way. We are most decidedly not.
The whole night really kinda sucked because I was, once again, given a shining example of how when the left goes too far, they end up sounding like right wingers. Chem trails, the Bilderbergers, Monsanto, and a whole host of other moustache twirlers are all comin' to gin us!
Great.
After I took far more than I should, I posited that they don't sound any different than those moonbats on the far right and their evil government conspiracy theories. That made them very upset, offering several "Wow. Just wows" at my "naivete" at "how the world really works." One woman kept asking me over and over again if I knew just what the Federal Reserve really was. I replied that I did. When she asked for an explanation and I gave her one, she rolled her eyes and accused me of being "blind." Her boyfriend then described to me his theory that Barack Obama was taken aside after about a month in office and given his orders.
"Just look at the difference in his face after a few weeks in office. He went from young looking to ashen. Yeah, they told how it was."
"Who is they?" I asked.
"Ah, c'mon Mark, you know!!"
I still don't.
I tried to explain to them that I had been through all this in the 1990s, listening regularly to Art Bell and Coast to Coast. I still listen to it today but realize with the wisdom of my years that most of this stuff is just fictional garbage. More frustrating is the sad fact that people on the Right view all liberals as being this way. We are most decidedly not.
The whole night really kinda sucked because I was, once again, given a shining example of how when the left goes too far, they end up sounding like right wingers. Chem trails, the Bilderbergers, Monsanto, and a whole host of other moustache twirlers are all comin' to gin us!
Friday, February 28, 2014
Conceal and Carry A Go Go
The Christian Science Monitor has a piece up about conceal and carry that is most excellent. It starts off with this story.
Charles Ingram and Robert Webster were neighbors in Florida, but friends said the two older men had little love for each other and often quarreled. On a spring day in 2010, the two men, both gun enthusiasts who had state permits to carry concealed weapons, got into another argument across their lawns.
This time, police later said, both men pulled out their weapons. When Mr. Webster began approaching, Mr. Ingram raised his gun, as did Webster. Two shots rang out simultaneously, and both men fell. Webster died almost instantly, Ingram less than a month later. That "Deadwood"-style neighborhood gunfight is one of 555 examples compiled by advocates of gun control detailing how the mere presence of legal guns can turn mundane moments into tragedies.
I think we are going to see a lot more of this as conceal carry numbers have risen dramatically in the last 20 years. Back then, there were less than a million. Now?
In a country that witnesses bloody gun violence of all kinds on a daily basis, Ingram and Webster were part of a growing cohort, a sort of standing militia of what concealed-carry advocates say are between 8 million and 11 million citizens carrying concealed guns in public in the name of protecting themselves and those around them.
Those around them...yeah, I don't need their fucking protection. They can take their fear, anger, hatred, and paranoia and shove it up their collective asses.
Complicating this rise of the concealed gun in America, new research on the psychology of what is called "embodied cognition" suggests that simply the act of holding a gun shades one's perceptions, sometimes at odds with reality. To opponents of concealed carry, such research suggests that a toxic mix of politics and paranoia, added to 30 ounces of chromed steel tucked legally under a belt at Wal-Mart, ultimately equals a scarier and more dangerous society.
Sounds pretty familiar to me. I wonder if this article will bounce off the gun blogger's bubble or if there will be some actual reflection. Thankfully, they aren't all like this.
"There is a certain psychology at work with some who carry openly or concealed," writes columnist Stephen Lemons, in the Phoenix New Times newspaper. "I have seen it in the nativist camp, where these grizzled old white extremists try to provoke their enemies with guns on their hips, itching to blast someone."
While that may be harsh, even some concealed-carry proponents see a strain of disturbing behavior among some carriers. "Acting like a deadly threat is imminent, walking around stores jerking your head around ... 'on a swivel,' planning your tactical movement from the gas pump to the cash register IS paranoid behavior, unless you live in Fallujah," writes one permit holder on a concealed-carry Internet forum. "Acting like every situation involves a critical threat is goofy.... Don't confuse life with movies."
Indeed.
Charles Ingram and Robert Webster were neighbors in Florida, but friends said the two older men had little love for each other and often quarreled. On a spring day in 2010, the two men, both gun enthusiasts who had state permits to carry concealed weapons, got into another argument across their lawns.
This time, police later said, both men pulled out their weapons. When Mr. Webster began approaching, Mr. Ingram raised his gun, as did Webster. Two shots rang out simultaneously, and both men fell. Webster died almost instantly, Ingram less than a month later. That "Deadwood"-style neighborhood gunfight is one of 555 examples compiled by advocates of gun control detailing how the mere presence of legal guns can turn mundane moments into tragedies.
I think we are going to see a lot more of this as conceal carry numbers have risen dramatically in the last 20 years. Back then, there were less than a million. Now?
In a country that witnesses bloody gun violence of all kinds on a daily basis, Ingram and Webster were part of a growing cohort, a sort of standing militia of what concealed-carry advocates say are between 8 million and 11 million citizens carrying concealed guns in public in the name of protecting themselves and those around them.
Those around them...yeah, I don't need their fucking protection. They can take their fear, anger, hatred, and paranoia and shove it up their collective asses.
Complicating this rise of the concealed gun in America, new research on the psychology of what is called "embodied cognition" suggests that simply the act of holding a gun shades one's perceptions, sometimes at odds with reality. To opponents of concealed carry, such research suggests that a toxic mix of politics and paranoia, added to 30 ounces of chromed steel tucked legally under a belt at Wal-Mart, ultimately equals a scarier and more dangerous society.
Sounds pretty familiar to me. I wonder if this article will bounce off the gun blogger's bubble or if there will be some actual reflection. Thankfully, they aren't all like this.
"There is a certain psychology at work with some who carry openly or concealed," writes columnist Stephen Lemons, in the Phoenix New Times newspaper. "I have seen it in the nativist camp, where these grizzled old white extremists try to provoke their enemies with guns on their hips, itching to blast someone."
While that may be harsh, even some concealed-carry proponents see a strain of disturbing behavior among some carriers. "Acting like a deadly threat is imminent, walking around stores jerking your head around ... 'on a swivel,' planning your tactical movement from the gas pump to the cash register IS paranoid behavior, unless you live in Fallujah," writes one permit holder on a concealed-carry Internet forum. "Acting like every situation involves a critical threat is goofy.... Don't confuse life with movies."
Indeed.
America Is Not In Decline
Dovetailing quite nicely with Kurtzman's Second American Century is this piece from Politico magazine by Sean Starrs. Our continual and often hyperbolic obsession with "America's decline" really can be most hysterical and irrational.
It all started with a wave of declinism in the 1980s, set off by the rise of Japan. Then the doom and gloom suddenly vanished amid the triumphalism of the 1990s, which transformed the United States into the world’s only superpower. After the Sept. 11 attacks and the invasion of Iraq, many thought “empire” was a better moniker, with the United States apparently able to reshape world order virtually at will. And then just a few years later — poof! — declinism returned with a vengeance, with American power supposedly crashing like the latest Hollywood reality queen. China supplanted Japan as a hegemon on the rise, and the biggest global financial crisis since 1929 — emanating from the United States itself — was allegedly the final nail in the coffin of the American century.
This really is an issue that both parties are guilty of having their heads up their asses. Recently and in the same day, Bubba T and my ultra libertarian/rabid Randian brother in law both foamed at the mouth about how America is doomed. I realized how similar the far left and the far right sound when they are shrill:) But this is exactly what Starrs is talking about in this piece. For example, the metric by which we measure Chinese power is flawed.
China, for example, has been the world’s largest electronics exporter since 2004, and yet this does not at all mean that Chinese firms are world leaders in electronics. Even though China has a virtual monopoly on the export of iPhones, for instance, it is Apple that reaps the majority of profits from iPhone sales. More broadly, more than three-quarters of the top 200 exporting firms from China are actually foreign, not Chinese. This is totally different from the prior rise of Japan, propelled by Japanese firms producing in Japan and exporting abroad.
In the age of globalization, we can't measure a country's economic power in the same way.
It all started with a wave of declinism in the 1980s, set off by the rise of Japan. Then the doom and gloom suddenly vanished amid the triumphalism of the 1990s, which transformed the United States into the world’s only superpower. After the Sept. 11 attacks and the invasion of Iraq, many thought “empire” was a better moniker, with the United States apparently able to reshape world order virtually at will. And then just a few years later — poof! — declinism returned with a vengeance, with American power supposedly crashing like the latest Hollywood reality queen. China supplanted Japan as a hegemon on the rise, and the biggest global financial crisis since 1929 — emanating from the United States itself — was allegedly the final nail in the coffin of the American century.
This really is an issue that both parties are guilty of having their heads up their asses. Recently and in the same day, Bubba T and my ultra libertarian/rabid Randian brother in law both foamed at the mouth about how America is doomed. I realized how similar the far left and the far right sound when they are shrill:) But this is exactly what Starrs is talking about in this piece. For example, the metric by which we measure Chinese power is flawed.
China, for example, has been the world’s largest electronics exporter since 2004, and yet this does not at all mean that Chinese firms are world leaders in electronics. Even though China has a virtual monopoly on the export of iPhones, for instance, it is Apple that reaps the majority of profits from iPhone sales. More broadly, more than three-quarters of the top 200 exporting firms from China are actually foreign, not Chinese. This is totally different from the prior rise of Japan, propelled by Japanese firms producing in Japan and exporting abroad.
In the age of globalization, we can't measure a country's economic power in the same way.
What Did The World's Fair of 2014 Look Like 50 Years Ago?
Issac Asimov was pretty accurate when he predicted what the world would look like in 50 years. Check out one of his prognostications.
Robots will neither be common nor very good in 2014, but they will be in existence. The I.B.M. exhibit at the present fair has no robots but it is dedicated to computers, which are shown in all their amazing complexity, notably in the task of translating Russian into English. If machines are that smart today, what may not be in the works 50 years hence? It will be such computers, much miniaturized, that will serve as the "brains" of robots. In fact, the I.B.M. building at the 2014 World's Fair may have, as one of its prime exhibits, a robot housemaid*large, clumsy, slow- moving but capable of general picking-up, arranging, cleaning and manipulation of various appliances. It will undoubtedly amuse the fairgoers to scatter debris over the floor in order to see the robot lumberingly remove it and classify it into "throw away" and "set aside." (Robots for gardening work will also have made their appearance.)
Exactly what they look like now. The whole piece is amazing. Read it!
Robots will neither be common nor very good in 2014, but they will be in existence. The I.B.M. exhibit at the present fair has no robots but it is dedicated to computers, which are shown in all their amazing complexity, notably in the task of translating Russian into English. If machines are that smart today, what may not be in the works 50 years hence? It will be such computers, much miniaturized, that will serve as the "brains" of robots. In fact, the I.B.M. building at the 2014 World's Fair may have, as one of its prime exhibits, a robot housemaid*large, clumsy, slow- moving but capable of general picking-up, arranging, cleaning and manipulation of various appliances. It will undoubtedly amuse the fairgoers to scatter debris over the floor in order to see the robot lumberingly remove it and classify it into "throw away" and "set aside." (Robots for gardening work will also have made their appearance.)
Exactly what they look like now. The whole piece is amazing. Read it!
Thursday, February 27, 2014
A Generation Lost To Fox News
Edwin Lyngar discusses how he lost his father to conservative rage via Fox News. Thrashing hysteria indeed. Some of the highlights.
I enjoyed Fox News for many years, as a libertarian and frequent Republican voter. I used to share many, though not all, of my father’s values, but something happened over the past few years. As I drifted left, the white, Republican right veered into incalculable levels of conservative rage, arriving at their inevitable destination with the creation of the Tea Party movement.
Incalculable levels of conservative rage...I wonder if he has ever checked out any right wing blogs:)
I don’t recall my father being so hostile when I was growing up. He was conservative, to be sure, but conventionally and thoughtfully so. He is a kind and generous man and a good father, but over the past five or 10 years, he’s become so conservative that I can’t even find a label for it. What has changed? He consumes a daily diet of nothing except Fox News. He has for a decade or more. He has no email account and doesn’t watch sports. He refuses to so much as touch a keyboard and has never been on the Internet, ever. He thinks higher education destroys people, not only because of Fox News, but also because I drifted left during and after graduate school.
I was the same way when I watched Fox News after 9-11. They thrive on anger and fear but it's not just them. Conservative media as a whole is patterned after the Fox model.
Truly, this is a sad piece. As Lyngar notes, his father's generation are "a wounded and thrashing legacy of white hegemony." This is why they act the way they do. They are afraid.
I enjoyed Fox News for many years, as a libertarian and frequent Republican voter. I used to share many, though not all, of my father’s values, but something happened over the past few years. As I drifted left, the white, Republican right veered into incalculable levels of conservative rage, arriving at their inevitable destination with the creation of the Tea Party movement.
Incalculable levels of conservative rage...I wonder if he has ever checked out any right wing blogs:)
I don’t recall my father being so hostile when I was growing up. He was conservative, to be sure, but conventionally and thoughtfully so. He is a kind and generous man and a good father, but over the past five or 10 years, he’s become so conservative that I can’t even find a label for it. What has changed? He consumes a daily diet of nothing except Fox News. He has for a decade or more. He has no email account and doesn’t watch sports. He refuses to so much as touch a keyboard and has never been on the Internet, ever. He thinks higher education destroys people, not only because of Fox News, but also because I drifted left during and after graduate school.
I was the same way when I watched Fox News after 9-11. They thrive on anger and fear but it's not just them. Conservative media as a whole is patterned after the Fox model.
Truly, this is a sad piece. As Lyngar notes, his father's generation are "a wounded and thrashing legacy of white hegemony." This is why they act the way they do. They are afraid.
Good Words
Many Americans warmly smiled when former first lady Barbara Bush said “I love Bill Clinton.” The respect and affection between former presidents Clinton and George H.W. Bush is genuine and very American. It hearkens back to an Americanism dating back to the early republic of Jefferson and Adams, which voters would greatly value today, when political opponents collaborated with mutual respect to advance national interests.
The mudslinging attack by Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) against Clinton is a textbook case of why Kamikaze Republicans lost national elections in 2006, 2008 and 2012. Voters are disgusted by this lowball brand of GOP politics, practiced by politicians who look mean, shallow and small against a former president who is widely liked, admired and respected. Ditto for Republicans addicted to what I recently called their “Benghazi disease,” which has left former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton towering above potential Republican opponents in polling for the 2016 presidential race.
--Brent Budowsky, The Hill
In addition to voters being disgusted by these sorts of attacks, they also don't take a shine to the far right. The Republicans have a chance to make some real gains this year. Will they be able to resist the catnip of going full on moonbat as they have done in the past four elections?
The mudslinging attack by Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) against Clinton is a textbook case of why Kamikaze Republicans lost national elections in 2006, 2008 and 2012. Voters are disgusted by this lowball brand of GOP politics, practiced by politicians who look mean, shallow and small against a former president who is widely liked, admired and respected. Ditto for Republicans addicted to what I recently called their “Benghazi disease,” which has left former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton towering above potential Republican opponents in polling for the 2016 presidential race.
--Brent Budowsky, The Hill
In addition to voters being disgusted by these sorts of attacks, they also don't take a shine to the far right. The Republicans have a chance to make some real gains this year. Will they be able to resist the catnip of going full on moonbat as they have done in the past four elections?
The Second American Century
Joel Kurtzman, former Editor in Chief of the Harvard Business Review, recently posted a great summation of his new book, Unleashing the Second American Century: Four Forces for Economic Dominance. Looks like I am going to need this book ASAP.
The core of his argument is optimism. Despite the continual drudge of negative views of the future of our country, we are indeed poised to continue our hegemonic dominance of the world. Kurtzman posits that because of the following four reasons, the future is looking very, very bright for you country.
American Creativity
Manufacturing Renaissance
An Energy Bonanza
Abundant Capital
He offers brief summations of each of these reasons in the linked post above. I'll be taking about this book as I read it, thus the new tag called "Second American Cenutry."
If I were a political party in this country (hint hint), I would jump on the Kurtzman bandwagon right now. Optimism always wins the day over anger, hatred, and fear.
The core of his argument is optimism. Despite the continual drudge of negative views of the future of our country, we are indeed poised to continue our hegemonic dominance of the world. Kurtzman posits that because of the following four reasons, the future is looking very, very bright for you country.
American Creativity
Manufacturing Renaissance
An Energy Bonanza
Abundant Capital
He offers brief summations of each of these reasons in the linked post above. I'll be taking about this book as I read it, thus the new tag called "Second American Cenutry."
If I were a political party in this country (hint hint), I would jump on the Kurtzman bandwagon right now. Optimism always wins the day over anger, hatred, and fear.
Wednesday, February 26, 2014
A Tool-Using Fun-Loving Crow
There's been a long debate over what differentiates us from animals. Some say it's self-awareness, some say it's language, some say it's tool use, and so on.
Here's a hilarious example of a crow that demonstrates two very human qualities: tool use and having fun.
Why did the crow decide to do this? It seems unlikely someone would have gone to the effort of training it. Did it see some kids sledding down a hill and copy them? Or did it slide down a roof one day and find that it was fun but kind of rough on the tootsies, so it looked for something to sit on to prevent chafing?
Crows have long been known to be quite intelligent, able to count up to at least five, use tools and recognize human faces. Squirrels and scrub jays have a "theory of mind:" they know that if other animals see them hide food that they'll have to come back and move it. There have been parrots with large vocabularies, the ability to count and the intellectual and emotional capacity of young human children. There's a border collie that knows the names of hundreds of objects and can perform fairly complex commands with them. Dolphins exhibit self awareness. Apes like Koko and Kanzi can communicate with humans using sign language or computer lexigrams, and Koko even wanted pet kittens.
Pet owners can describe any number of seemingly intelligent behaviors that their charges exhibit; most of these are likely due to repetition and anthropomorphization, but the undeniable conclusion is that animals can form a strong two-way emotional bond with humans that extends beyond a trained Pavlovian response.
From these examples it's clear that some animals have expressed each of the abilities that comprise human cognition. Humans are the only creatures that assemble the whole package into what we call intelligence.
Intelligence is not an either-or proposition: it's a continuum with a huge variation among individuals of the same species.
Here's a hilarious example of a crow that demonstrates two very human qualities: tool use and having fun.
Why did the crow decide to do this? It seems unlikely someone would have gone to the effort of training it. Did it see some kids sledding down a hill and copy them? Or did it slide down a roof one day and find that it was fun but kind of rough on the tootsies, so it looked for something to sit on to prevent chafing?
Crows have long been known to be quite intelligent, able to count up to at least five, use tools and recognize human faces. Squirrels and scrub jays have a "theory of mind:" they know that if other animals see them hide food that they'll have to come back and move it. There have been parrots with large vocabularies, the ability to count and the intellectual and emotional capacity of young human children. There's a border collie that knows the names of hundreds of objects and can perform fairly complex commands with them. Dolphins exhibit self awareness. Apes like Koko and Kanzi can communicate with humans using sign language or computer lexigrams, and Koko even wanted pet kittens.
Pet owners can describe any number of seemingly intelligent behaviors that their charges exhibit; most of these are likely due to repetition and anthropomorphization, but the undeniable conclusion is that animals can form a strong two-way emotional bond with humans that extends beyond a trained Pavlovian response.
From these examples it's clear that some animals have expressed each of the abilities that comprise human cognition. Humans are the only creatures that assemble the whole package into what we call intelligence.
Intelligence is not an either-or proposition: it's a continuum with a huge variation among individuals of the same species.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)