...more recent posts
Tuesday, Aug 01, 2006
Overthrow
I finished Kinzer's Overthrow on the flight back from NYC.
The book details the US actions behind the overthrows of fourteen regimes in: Hawaii, Cuba, the Philippines, Puerto Rico, Nicaragua, Honduras, Iran, Guatemala, South Vietnam, Chile, Grenada, Panama, Afghanistan, and Iraq.
It reads as a series of tragedies, as fools wielding great power repeatedly mislead the US into criminal acts and strategic miscalculations on a massive scale. Kinzer lets each overthrow unfold in a narrative. In the manner of someone watching a horror movie, I couldn't help but mutter, "No, don't go that way", again and again.
The overthrow of Iran is the most tragic of them all. A democracy was overthrown in the heart of the middle east, and replaced with a repressive dictator. The backlash against that dictator lead, two decades later, to a takeover by a repressive Islamic revolution, which has served as an inspiration to and sponsor of Islamic militants -- including those who are currently firing missiles into Israel. And if you asked the average American what major event happened in Iran in 1953, only a few would have the slightest clue.
The individual stories of these overthrows are elements of Kinzer's larger goal of finding patterns in the motivations and patterns in the aftermaths. Recuring themes are a desire to protect US business interests and results of worsening conditions for both the US and the countries whose regimes were overthrown.
One aspect of tragedy that Kinzer laments is that often the US government has overthrown regimes that share US ideals, including democracy, market economy and fair play. I think this is a generous reading of the American people, who too often place the highest value on US hegemony. Below is an excerpt from a reader review on Amazon that helps illustrate the point.
More On Crichton
jimlouis suggested that I read Crichton's new anti-global warming book, as a way to see both sides of the debate. I'm not so sure I will. His short speech, linked to in the post below, pissed me off so much I don't know if I can handle a full novel of it.
One point he drills in over and over and over is that we can't know the future, and it's a fool's mission to attempt to do anything for future generations. He explains that in1900, New Yorkers might have thought that by 2000 vast piles of horseshit would have been one of the chief problems in NYC. By golly, by gosh, I suppose some schmuck might have worried about huge mountains of horseshit burying Manhattan. Although others would have noted, "There's precious little horseshit in the Boston subway. Perhaps we should build one of those!"
Fucking retard. Crichton engages in a sort of purposeful ignorance that pisses me right off.
So, on an up note, let me mention some 19th century visionaries, the Sempervirens Club. Through their efforts, at least some of the ancient coastal redwoods still live. These are folks who in 1900 had the novel concept, "Holy Jeebus, you don't have to cut down all the trees, do ya?"
Their efforts led to what is now Big Basin State Park.
Thanks 19th century enviro-whackos!
Shorter Michael Crichton
- Collecting data with radio telescopes and analyzing them for potential communications signatures is not a scientific exploration, but rather is a religious activity which has fundamentally undermined the practice of science.
A lecture by Michael Crichton
California Institute of Technology
Pasadena, CA
January 17, 2003
My topic today sounds humorous but unfortunately I am serious. I am going to argue that extraterrestrials lie behind global warming. Or to speak more precisely, I will argue that a belief in extraterrestrials has paved the way, in a progression of steps, to a belief in global warming. Charting this progression of belief will be my task today.
Crichton also says that consensus has no place is science. Hmmm, I guess we can just toss all those "peer reviewed" journals in the trash bin. They're nothing more than popularity contests.
He asserts that the only science that counts is experimental science, with repeatable experiments. So unless you have a whole set of identical planet Earths upon which you can perform various global experiements, it is totally ridiculous to draw global conclusions.
His fundamental position regarding the future is: We just don't know. There are unknown unknowns and unknowable unknowables! Don't dare think ahead, because you're just wasting your time!
Thanks, Mike. You are the Donald Rumsfeld of science.
[Disclaimer: I knew an engineer who developed signal processing HW for the SETI Institute in the late eighties/early nineties.]
Monday, Jul 31, 2006
David Brooks S. Broder: Grand Master Concern Troll
"Doctor" Laura: Patriarchal Hegemon
I listen to KSFO HateTalk 560 from time to time just to see what's going on with the American Taliban. "Dr." Laura is on if I'm doing mid-day errands.
I've gotten used to her old-timey views. I've gotten used to the idea of a Jewish woman giving props to fundamentalist Christians. But a call today really surprised me.
A woman with a very slight, possibly Arab or Persian accent called in to say that her husband "got rough with" her when she declined sex. They had had a difficult argument the previous day, she wasn't quite over it, and simply wasn't in the mood. While describing her feelings in the aftermath of this, she said in strong terms that she had the absolute right to refuse sex with her husband, and said "no means no."
Under the circumstances of recent physical abuse, the way she expressed herself was perfectly reasonable, but not to the good "doctor". Ms. Schlessinger accused the caller of spousal abuse for saying no. And her refusal was just as bad as what the husband did, although his act is illegal. Schlessinger also said that the woman was part to blame. Hear that bitches? All your sex is belong to your man! Submit quietly like a good vassal, and everything will work out fine.
Thanks for the insight "doctor". Now here's some advice for both "Dr." Laura and the caller's husband: Go fuck yourselves.