Comments on: Getting it right http://crookedtimber.org/2003/12/22/getting-it-right/ Out of the crooked timber of humanity, no straight thing was ever made Sun, 08 Nov 2009 10:51:42 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 By: Bob http://crookedtimber.org/2003/12/22/getting-it-right/comment-page-1/#comment-11980 Bob Fri, 26 Dec 2003 13:36:56 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/wp/?p=803#comment-11980 Btw Philip Stevens, then political editor of the Financial Times and now associate editor, wrote in his weekly column on 28 April 2000: "Mr Blair is manipulative, he is obsessed with presentation, he stifles legitimate dissent." I make that full marks for perception. Btw Philip Stevens, then political editor of the Financial Times and now associate editor, wrote in his weekly column on 28 April 2000: “Mr Blair is manipulative, he is obsessed with presentation, he stifles legitimate dissent.” I make that full marks for perception.

]]> By: Bob http://crookedtimber.org/2003/12/22/getting-it-right/comment-page-1/#comment-11979 Bob Thu, 25 Dec 2003 21:48:41 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/wp/?p=803#comment-11979 All of which helps to explain why more voters believe Labour is more sleaze ridden than the Conservatives? The alternative, unsurprisingly, is that some with computers follow the political news and recall the pressing circumstances relating to Keith Vaz's sudden health problem on the run up to the 2001 election, or the donation to the Labour Party by a publisher of porn magazines and what the then chairman of the Labour Party said about that in an interview: "If you are asking if we are going to sit in moral judgment, in political judgment, on those who wish to contribute to the Labour party, then the answer to that is no" - quoted at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/2357617.stm Some even remember another Party donor and the Mittal Steel affair, a supposed "British" company that wasn't even registered in Britain and employed hardly anyone here or what Tony Blair said to the Chicago Economic Club in April 1999 about: ". . If we want a world ruled by law and by international co-operation then we have to support the UN as its central pillar. . ." - at: http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?cp=4&kaid=128&subid=187&contentid=829 Of course, it was billed as a keynote speech at the time . . . They perhaps then remember the "sexed-up" dossiers to justify war with Iraq and wonder how many other lies and half-truths wrapped in spin there have been. What ever happened to Jo Moore, that Blairite apparatchik who thought 9-11 was a good day to bury bad news? They may also remember how Elizabeth Filkin was pushed out of her job as Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards. They perhaps recall the string of reports in the "leftist" press on the political sleaze and corruption in Labour heartland councils, which can be easily dug out with google, like: "The worst local government corruption case since the Poulson scandal of the 1970s ended yesterday with hefty jail terms for a senior Labour councillor and the property developer who bribed him. The four-year sentence for Peter Birks, former chairman of planning in Doncaster finished the virtual elimination of the old, miner-dominated Labour party in the South Yorkshire town, which has already seen two former council leaders and two former mayors among 21 councillors convicted of fraud. . ." - from: http://society.guardian.co.uk/councilsincrisis/comment/0,8146,666246,00.html "A council rocked by the fraudulent spending of anti-poverty grants on hotels and prostitutes may have lost the chance to reclaim much of the £200,000 stolen by its former deputy leader. Reed, 54, was taken to court this week from jail, where he is serving three years for the fraud, and warned by a judge that he could face another year in prison if he failed to meet repayments. He is likely to have to sell his house to meet liabilities over the thefts from the now-defunct National Local Government Forum Against Poverty." - from: http://society.guardian.co.uk/councilsincrisis/story/0,8150,914091,00.html Naturally, there's more, much more . . All of which helps to explain why more voters believe Labour is more sleaze ridden than the Conservatives? The alternative, unsurprisingly, is that some with computers follow the political news and recall the pressing circumstances relating to Keith Vaz’s sudden health problem on the run up to the 2001 election, or the donation to the Labour Party by a publisher of porn magazines and what the then chairman of the Labour Party said about that in an interview: “If you are asking if we are going to sit in moral judgment, in political judgment, on those who wish to contribute to the Labour party, then the answer to that is no” – quoted at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/2357617.stm Some even remember another Party donor and the Mittal Steel affair, a supposed “British” company that wasn’t even registered in Britain and employed hardly anyone here or what Tony Blair said to the Chicago Economic Club in April 1999 about: “. . If we want a world ruled by law and by international co-operation then we have to support the UN as its central pillar. . .” – at: http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?cp=4&kaid=128&subid=187&contentid=829 Of course, it was billed as a keynote speech at the time . . . They perhaps then remember the “sexed-up” dossiers to justify war with Iraq and wonder how many other lies and half-truths wrapped in spin there have been. What ever happened to Jo Moore, that Blairite apparatchik who thought 9-11 was a good day to bury bad news? They may also remember how Elizabeth Filkin was pushed out of her job as Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards. They perhaps recall the string of reports in the “leftist” press on the political sleaze and corruption in Labour heartland councils, which can be easily dug out with google, like: “The worst local government corruption case since the Poulson scandal of the 1970s ended yesterday with hefty jail terms for a senior Labour councillor and the property developer who bribed him. The four-year sentence for Peter Birks, former chairman of planning in Doncaster finished the virtual elimination of the old, miner-dominated Labour party in the South Yorkshire town, which has already seen two former council leaders and two former mayors among 21 councillors convicted of fraud. . .” – from: http://society.guardian.co.uk/councilsincrisis/comment/0,8146,666246,00.html “A council rocked by the fraudulent spending of anti-poverty grants on hotels and prostitutes may have lost the chance to reclaim much of the £200,000 stolen by its former deputy leader. Reed, 54, was taken to court this week from jail, where he is serving three years for the fraud, and warned by a judge that he could face another year in prison if he failed to meet repayments. He is likely to have to sell his house to meet liabilities over the thefts from the now-defunct National Local Government Forum Against Poverty.” – from: http://society.guardian.co.uk/councilsincrisis/story/0,8150,914091,00.html Naturally, there’s more, much more . .

]]> By: serial catowner http://crookedtimber.org/2003/12/22/getting-it-right/comment-page-1/#comment-11978 serial catowner Thu, 25 Dec 2003 14:15:26 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/wp/?p=803#comment-11978 Hard to remember that the blogosphere is inhabited by people who own computers and have connections. An optimistic bunch, not troubled too much by chronic health problems or the obsolescence of their job skills, and hopeful that most things will be twice as good in another four years. Unfortunately, the traditional institutions for problem solving antedate computers... Hard to remember that the blogosphere is inhabited by people who own computers and have connections. An optimistic bunch, not troubled too much by chronic health problems or the obsolescence of their job skills, and hopeful that most things will be twice as good in another four years. Unfortunately, the traditional institutions for problem solving antedate computers…

]]> By: Bob http://crookedtimber.org/2003/12/22/getting-it-right/comment-page-1/#comment-11977 Bob Wed, 24 Dec 2003 20:55:49 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/wp/?p=803#comment-11977 Alex, Thanks for the advice about joining the Conservatives. Of course, another switch between the parties in Britain is this: "More voters now consider the Labour Party 'sleazier' than the Conservatives, according to a poll." - at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/1825447.stm Alex, Thanks for the advice about joining the Conservatives. Of course, another switch between the parties in Britain is this: “More voters now consider the Labour Party ‘sleazier’ than the Conservatives, according to a poll.” – at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/1825447.stm

]]> By: Steve http://crookedtimber.org/2003/12/22/getting-it-right/comment-page-1/#comment-11976 Steve Tue, 23 Dec 2003 21:14:50 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/wp/?p=803#comment-11976 I consider myself a pragmatic progressive, and I am a trained scientist. I see a similar pattern in some of our local wingnuts who pounce upon me if I have a letter published in the local paper, say, lauding Dean as an alternative to Bush. The wingnuts' arguments are usually lacking in a certain logic, and they regurgitate many right-wing talking points that are explicitly designed to obfuscate. I'm not suggesting that all progressive ideas are necessarily nondebatable, but the low quality of the wingnuts' thought is impossible to refute, even if they had an open mind to begin with. But they're usually so sure of themselves that it isn't usually worth the time to respond... I consider myself a pragmatic progressive, and I am a trained scientist. I see a similar pattern in some of our local wingnuts who pounce upon me if I have a letter published in the local paper, say, lauding Dean as an alternative to Bush. The wingnuts’ arguments are usually lacking in a certain logic, and they regurgitate many right-wing talking points that are explicitly designed to obfuscate. I’m not suggesting that all progressive ideas are necessarily nondebatable, but the low quality of the wingnuts’ thought is impossible to refute, even if they had an open mind to begin with. But they’re usually so sure of themselves that it isn’t usually worth the time to respond…

]]> By: Thorley Winston http://crookedtimber.org/2003/12/22/getting-it-right/comment-page-1/#comment-11975 Thorley Winston Tue, 23 Dec 2003 20:31:43 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/wp/?p=803#comment-11975 Phelps wrote: <blockquote> I would agree that they are wrong, but not for the same reasons. I think that the popular and influential blogs are right wing, and they based the opinion on that. From that flows the other assertions — that the most successful bloggers are those who are most adept at reasoned argument and that leftwingers, unlike rightwingers, have no real arguments — when you only look at the top 100 or so blogs. </blockquote> That is how I interpreted the article as well. When I think of the most influential right-of-center blogs, I generally tend to think of Arnold Kling, the Volokh Conspiracy, Daniel Drezner, Asymmetrical Information, Winds of Change, and the like. Blogs which are generally about <b>ideas</b> and trying to persuade readers through pretty intellectually honest argument rather than just party spin and/or trading insults, which unfortunately tends to be both the norm and the highest achievement of most* left-of-center blogs that I’ve seen. TW * There are a few legal left-of-center blogs I've read which appear to be an exception to this but their influence is generally smaller IMNHO than that of the right-of-center blogs I have listed and yes Armed Liberal is also a part of Winds of Change. Phelps wrote:
I would agree that they are wrong, but not for the same reasons. I think that the popular and influential blogs are right wing, and they based the opinion on that. From that flows the other assertions — that the most successful bloggers are those who are most adept at reasoned argument and that leftwingers, unlike rightwingers, have no real arguments — when you only look at the top 100 or so blogs.
That is how I interpreted the article as well. When I think of the most influential right-of-center blogs, I generally tend to think of Arnold Kling, the Volokh Conspiracy, Daniel Drezner, Asymmetrical Information, Winds of Change, and the like. Blogs which are generally about ideas and trying to persuade readers through pretty intellectually honest argument rather than just party spin and/or trading insults, which unfortunately tends to be both the norm and the highest achievement of most* left-of-center blogs that I’ve seen. TW * There are a few legal left-of-center blogs I’ve read which appear to be an exception to this but their influence is generally smaller IMNHO than that of the right-of-center blogs I have listed and yes Armed Liberal is also a part of Winds of Change.

]]> By: Phelps http://crookedtimber.org/2003/12/22/getting-it-right/comment-page-1/#comment-11974 Phelps Tue, 23 Dec 2003 19:07:58 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/wp/?p=803#comment-11974 I would agree that they are wrong, but not for the same reasons. I think that the <b>popular</b> and influential blogs are right wing, and they based the opinion on that. From that flows the other assertions -- that the most successful bloggers are those who are most adept at reasoned argument and that leftwingers, unlike rightwingers, have no real arguments -- when you only look at the top 100 or so blogs. ASI is probably right in that the left has generally prevailed when they can resort to violence and threats of violence, which is an option unavailible to them on the internet. In the absence of the option of violence, libertarianism becomes more and more practical, and I think that is the reason it is surpassing conservatism on the net. I would agree that they are wrong, but not for the same reasons. I think that the popular and influential blogs are right wing, and they based the opinion on that. From that flows the other assertions—that the most successful bloggers are those who are most adept at reasoned argument and that leftwingers, unlike rightwingers, have no real arguments—when you only look at the top 100 or so blogs. ASI is probably right in that the left has generally prevailed when they can resort to violence and threats of violence, which is an option unavailible to them on the internet. In the absence of the option of violence, libertarianism becomes more and more practical, and I think that is the reason it is surpassing conservatism on the net.

]]> By: AL http://crookedtimber.org/2003/12/22/getting-it-right/comment-page-1/#comment-11973 AL Tue, 23 Dec 2003 18:04:32 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/wp/?p=803#comment-11973 RE: rv. agnos False syllogism (as in deductive logic that disproves the premise). RE: rv. agnos False syllogism (as in deductive logic that disproves the premise).

]]> By: Rv. Agnos http://crookedtimber.org/2003/12/22/getting-it-right/comment-page-1/#comment-11972 Rv. Agnos Tue, 23 Dec 2003 17:15:15 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/wp/?p=803#comment-11972 Self-refuting might be best answer. I guess I thought there might be a word that meant "self-refuting." "Heterological" is not quite right, since it has more to do with the word itself than its meaning. Self-refuting might be best answer. I guess I thought there might be a word that meant “self-refuting.” “Heterological” is not quite right, since it has more to do with the word itself than its meaning.

]]> By: Mikhel http://crookedtimber.org/2003/12/22/getting-it-right/comment-page-1/#comment-11971 Mikhel Tue, 23 Dec 2003 16:37:42 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/wp/?p=803#comment-11971 Theyeti -- In which post did the members of CT make the claim that liberal viewpoints -- counter to conservative -- require intelligence and reasoned analysis? Theyeti— In which post did the members of CT make the claim that liberal viewpoints—counter to conservative—require intelligence and reasoned analysis?

]]> By: TheYeti http://crookedtimber.org/2003/12/22/getting-it-right/comment-page-1/#comment-11970 TheYeti Tue, 23 Dec 2003 16:07:52 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/wp/?p=803#comment-11970 Brilliant. You took a tantrum from the Adam Smith Institute and showed it to be a farce, mainly by failing to acknowledge the general argument was originally put forward by leftists. 'Why is it talk radio is so attractive to right wingers?' 'Because liberal viewpoints require thought and reason and intelligent discussion. ' 'Rightwingers just like to hate and simplify their positions, which is why demagogues like Rush do so well.' If you were truly thinking this through, you would have pointed out the foolishness of both sides. Unfortnately, you sound like a partisan hack - just like the fine fellows at the ASI. Brilliant. You took a tantrum from the Adam Smith Institute and showed it to be a farce, mainly by failing to acknowledge the general argument was originally put forward by leftists. ‘Why is it talk radio is so attractive to right wingers?’ ‘Because liberal viewpoints require thought and reason and intelligent discussion. ’ ‘Rightwingers just like to hate and simplify their positions, which is why demagogues like Rush do so well.’ If you were truly thinking this through, you would have pointed out the foolishness of both sides. Unfortnately, you sound like a partisan hack – just like the fine fellows at the ASI.

]]> By: Alex Singleton http://crookedtimber.org/2003/12/22/getting-it-right/comment-page-1/#comment-11969 Alex Singleton Tue, 23 Dec 2003 13:25:39 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/wp/?p=803#comment-11969 To Bob, who wrote that <i>“right-wing” and “left-wing” have long since ceased to have any precise political connotations</i>, I largely agree. I'm a libertarian or classical liberal, rather that a conservative. However, I do think that libertarians and conservatives can work together quite well, particularly in Britain where there is a tradition of libertarianism within the Conservative Party. To Bob, who wrote that “right-wing” and “left-wing” have long since ceased to have any precise political connotations, I largely agree. I’m a libertarian or classical liberal, rather that a conservative. However, I do think that libertarians and conservatives can work together quite well, particularly in Britain where there is a tradition of libertarianism within the Conservative Party.

]]> By: msg http://crookedtimber.org/2003/12/22/getting-it-right/comment-page-1/#comment-11968 msg Tue, 23 Dec 2003 09:43:51 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/wp/?p=803#comment-11968 The statement at the end is false. Left and right are terms of convenience that have almost nothing to do with actual humans living actual human lives. As indices of specific events with linear components they may help political consultants and advertising analysts make their money, but most of the real people I know don't think of themselves in those terms, or didn't until that artificial dividing-up became inescapable without conscious resistance. I don't see it as being linear and accurate, both. It's Manichean politics. It reminds me of the one-drop rule. The way Colin Powell and Condoleeza Rice are seen as 'black'. Strom Thurmond's daughter has one 'white' parent, and one 'black' parent, therefore she's black. That racist view is so ingrained it's invisible. Someone who thinks one way about taxes is 'right-wing', someone who thinks one way about human rights is 'left-wing', but it seems obvious the terms themselves are being defined by a different group altogether. So that the categories are themselves an action, ennabling one, handicapping another. A three-dimensional solid composed of millions of autonomous, or semi-autonomous, moving parts, is being delivered up as a bell-curve line on an XY graph. — Too many of us were raised with the illusion of the commanding strength of truth and logic. Too many still harbor that illusion, that simply explaining to psychotic madmen that they don't make sense and they're causing grievous harm to innocent people will be enough to stop them. The results of that delusional comfort are all around us. The statement at the beginning was true. The statement at the end is false. Left and right are terms of convenience that have almost nothing to do with actual humans living actual human lives. As indices of specific events with linear components they may help political consultants and advertising analysts make their money, but most of the real people I know don’t think of themselves in those terms, or didn’t until that artificial dividing-up became inescapable without conscious resistance. I don’t see it as being linear and accurate, both. It’s Manichean politics. It reminds me of the one-drop rule. The way Colin Powell and Condoleeza Rice are seen as ‘black’. Strom Thurmond’s daughter has one ‘white’ parent, and one ‘black’ parent, therefore she’s black. That racist view is so ingrained it’s invisible. Someone who thinks one way about taxes is ‘right-wing’, someone who thinks one way about human rights is ‘left-wing’, but it seems obvious the terms themselves are being defined by a different group altogether. So that the categories are themselves an action, ennabling one, handicapping another. A three-dimensional solid composed of millions of autonomous, or semi-autonomous, moving parts, is being delivered up as a bell-curve line on an XY graph. — Too many of us were raised with the illusion of the commanding strength of truth and logic. Too many still harbor that illusion, that simply explaining to psychotic madmen that they don’t make sense and they’re causing grievous harm to innocent people will be enough to stop them. The results of that delusional comfort are all around us. The statement at the beginning was true.

]]> By: Jeremy Osner http://crookedtimber.org/2003/12/22/getting-it-right/comment-page-1/#comment-11967 Jeremy Osner Tue, 23 Dec 2003 02:15:25 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/wp/?p=803#comment-11967 Matt -- similarly, Jim Kweskin and the Jug Band released an album some years back called, "See Reverse Side for Title". Matt—similarly, Jim Kweskin and the Jug Band released an album some years back called, “See Reverse Side for Title”.

]]> By: Matt Weiner http://crookedtimber.org/2003/12/22/getting-it-right/comment-page-1/#comment-11966 Matt Weiner Mon, 22 Dec 2003 23:24:14 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/wp/?p=803#comment-11966 Self-refuting? The classic, apolitical example is "This page intentionally left blank"--it would be true if it hadn't been said. Self-refuting? The classic, apolitical example is “This page intentionally left blank”—it would be true if it hadn’t been said.

]]>