January 2005

I’ve gotten myself involved in something a little unusual (for me, anyway). I’m on the program committee of OOPSLA ’05. Specifically, I’ll be reading submissions in the ‘essay’ track. These are supposed to contain "in-depth reflections on technology, its relation to human endeavors, and its philosophical, sociological, psychological, historical, or anthropological underpinnings." I’m announcing it here because academic folk with solid but untechnical essays that fit the bill might not necessarily think to submit to a conference nominally devoted to object-oriented programming. I’m quite curious what sorts of things I’ll be reading. Should be fun.

The latest terrorist bombings in Iraq came closer than usual to home for Australia, with two soldiers suffering (reportedly) minor injuries in an attack on the Australian embassy[1], while 20 more Iraqis were killed, adding to the tens of thousands already killed by both/all sides in this terrible war, which seems to get more brutal and criminal every day.

It’s pretty clear by now that Iraq is approaching full-scale civil war and that, as is usually the case in civil wars, the presence of foreign troops is only making things worse. But rather than arguing about this last point, it might be better to put it to the test. This NYT Op-ed piece by three researchers from the Center for Strategic and International Studies suggests a referendum on US withdrawal to be held soon after the forthcoming elections. They make a pretty good case that it would be hard for the Baathists to justify disrupting such a referendum, though no doubt some would do so anyway. At least, this would be true if the main Shiite parties adhered to their previously stated position of favoring withdrawal.

[click to continue…]

A few quick links from around the blogosphere as I gear up to start teaching again …

“Scott McLemee”:http://www.prospect.org/web/view-print.ww?id=9051 in _TAP_ on teenage crushes and Susan Sontag.

“Kevin Drum”:http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2005_01/005480.php professes puzzlement about why Bush has been flogging the dead horse of social security; “Mark Schmitt”:http://markschmitt.typepad.com/decembrist/2005/01/bill_thomas_giv.html provides a plausible reason why.

“Brad DeLong”:http://www.j-bradford-delong.net/movable_type/2005-3_archives/000178.html on the “Salvador Option”:

bq. To claim that American officers calling for a “Salvador option” are unaware that they are calling for Death Squads is as incredible as claiming that Plantagenets calling for a “Canterbury option” are unaware of murder in the cathedral.

Finally, the BlogPAC sets up its “There Is No Crisis”:http://www.thereisnocrisis.com/ website (via “Matt Yglesias”:http://yglesias.typepad.com/matthew/2005/01/only_try_to_see.html). And a good thing too. A few weeks ago, Matt, Mark Schmitt and I had a good conversation about the need to build some sort of organization around the intellectual energy of the left blogosphere’s discussion of Social Security. This is a great start.

The Goethe Institute has “a really nice animated site”:http://www.goethe.de/ins/gb/lon/pro/ring/splashgerman.htm on Wagner’s Der Ring des Nibelungen. It is aimed at children, but it should appeal to anyone with an interest in the Ring. (English and German). There’s also much more on the Institute’s various web-projects “on this page”:http://www.goethe.de/dll/mat/fsl/prj/deindex.htm .

I’m about to start teaching a new course on global justice. The course starts by looking at some general theoretical issues around justice and then moves on to look at some recent attempts to extend thinking about justice to the global sphere. I’m also going to accompany this with a blog which will basically be an opportunity to point to relevant stuff elsewhere on the web as well as being a course noticeboard. The reading list is “here”:http://eis.bris.ac.uk/%7Eplcdib/tj.html and the blog (currently empty) is “here”:http://rousseau.typepad.com/globaljustice/ .

Juan Cole “is arguing”:http://www.juancole.com/2005/01/third-baath-coup-if-as-i-have-argued.html that the Iraqi “resistance” is mainly composed of Baathist forces and that they have

bq. been systematically killing members of the new political class. This is visible at the provincial level. The governors of Diyala and Baghdad provinces have recently been killed. The killing and kidnapping of members of the provincial governing councils go virtually unremarked in the US press but are legion. A female member of the Salahuddin GC was kidnapped and killed recently. The police chiefs of many cities have been killed or kidnapped, or members of their family have, such that many more have just resigned, often along with dozens of their men. The US is powerless to stop this campaign of assassination.

This campaign also targets Iraqi trade unionists, and that’s why I’ve signed “the open letter circulated by Labour Friends of Iraq”:http://www.labourfriendsofiraq.org.uk/archives/000167.html to protest against the silence of Britain’s Stop the War Coalition in the face of events like the torture and murder of Hadi Saleh, International Officer of the Iraqi Federation of Trade Unions on January 4. If you would also like to sign the open letter, contact info@labourfriendsofiraq.org.uk.

Jeff Jarvis has found a worthy target for his spleen- an appalling New York Times article by Sarah Boxer that repeatedly insinuates that the bloggers behind Iraq the Model are fakes, plants, or CIA operatives. Iraq the Model is a blog written by three Iraqi brothers; it’s especially popular among supporters of the war because of its generally pro-American, pro-invasion viewpoint.

The CIA really did covertly finance intellectual and cultural events and publications during the Cold War. On the internet, no one knows you’re a dog. On the face of it, it’s not impossible that there could be something behind any generic pro-American Iraqi bloggers. Sarah Boxer could have looked into it, checked out the things that could be checked, talked to the people who had met the bloggers in question, and written about what she found.

That’s not what she did. Here’s the first paragraph:

When I telephoned a man named Ali Fadhil in Baghdad last week, I wondered who might answer. A C.I.A. operative? An American posing as an Iraqi? Someone paid by the Defense Department to support the war? Or simply an Iraqi with some mixed feelings about the American presence in Iraq? Until he picked up the phone, he was just a ghost on the Internet.

Sexy! I kind of wish someone would profile me, so I could see what secrets I might have. I might be on the Democratic payroll. I might be writing to attract young women to my gingerbread house. Boxer might have no business printing insinuations without some pretty good evidence to back them up. What she has are the wankings from some other bloggers.

A man posting as Gandhi reported that his “polite antiwar comments were always met with barrages of crude abuse” from Iraq the Model’s readers. His conclusion? The blog “is a refuge for people who do not want to know the truth about Iraq, and the brothers take care to provide them with a comfortable information cocoon.” He added, “I hope some serious attention will be brought to bear on these Fadhil brothers and reveal them as frauds.”

What kind of frauds? One reader suggested that the brothers were real Iraqis but were being coached on what to write. Another, in support of that theory, noted the brothers’ suspiciously fluent English. A third person observed that coaching wasn’t necessary. All the C.I.A. would need to do to influence American opinion was find one pro-war blog and get a paper like USA Today to write about it.

If I tried to tell my Mom that some people in a blog comment thread were mean to me and the writers are weird and… she’d be asleep before I finished the sentence. And my Mom loves me. This should not have been printed.

In the UK the Inspector of Schools “has been criticizing Islamic schools for failing to prepare their pupils adequately for life in a modern society”:http://education.guardian.co.uk/faithschools/story/0,13882,1392833,00.html . The message that has been foregrounded by the press has to do with “our coherence as a nation”, which I don’t think of as an appropriate educational goal, and to that extent some of his remarks are regrettable. But when he makes the point that such schools may be reducing the opportunities available to their charges, that’s a concern that all liberals ought to agree with. So there are real issues here, which those schools have to address if they are to be permitted to continue operating. How depressing, then, that various figures have popped up to accuse him of “Islamophobia”, which, in this context, is just a way of trying to wriggle out of answering some tough and legitimate questions about the education that they’re providing.

In the 1970s, David Bowie released a series of albums that changed the sound, look and subject matter of rock music forever. His 1977 album Low, produced in collaboration with composer Brian Eno, was recently named the best album of the 1970s by Pitchfork. Elvis Costello recently called it one of the greatest albums ever in Vanity Fair. In terms of critical acclaim and popular success, I could compare him to Kurt Cobain, Bruce Springsteen, maybe REM.

In 1983, David Bowie starred in the vampire movie The Hunger. In 1986, he starred in the Jim Henson movie Labyrinth as Jared the Goblin King.

There’s nothing wrong with that, but I know music fans. I was too young to be tuned into indie rock debates at the time, so I’m curious to ask if anyone remembers. How did Bowie fans react to these roles?

I’m going to take advantage of my God-given right to quote my betters. From Kevin Drum:

I happen to think that liberals have basically won the church-state argument, and all that’s left is fighting over scraps that aren’t worth it. It just feeds the religious right’s feeling of righteous besiegement while gaining almost nothing in practical terms. Who really cares if Roy Moore plops a Ten Commandments monument in front of his courthouse?

Still, even though I feel that way personally, someone is going to take this kind of stuff to court. There’s just no way to stop it. And if I were a judge, what choice would I have then? The damn thing is pretty clearly unconstitutional whether it offends me personally or not. Ditto for Intelligent Design, which any honest judge would conclude after only cursory research is nothing more than creationism with a pretty face.

In the end, then, even though I agree with Nathan that some of the fringe issues being litigated today are probably counterproductive for liberals (though I’m less sure I agree with him about some of the core rulings of the 60s), I’m still not sure where this leaves us.

Ain’t that the truth. I’m looking at P.J. O’Rourke this morning, a writer whom I’ve always liked. (via Pandagon.) The self-described fun-loving Republican Party Reptile wrings a whole outraged column out of the Ten Commandments case from the summer of 2003. (Time flies, huh?) It’s part of his general thesis that the true opponents of Republicans are “jerks.” O’Rourke doesn’t seem to like the fact that jerks[1] wouldn’t let Moore install the Ten Commandments in front of a courthouse. Or, maybe he’s just responding to the wailing of jerks when exposed to the Ten Commandments in any capacity, wailing so high-pitched that only hackish[2] conservative pundits can hear it.

I’m not a Bush supporter. Rightly or wrongly, I don’t think of myself as a jerk. I wouldn’t have minded if the case hadn’t gone anywhere. What would O’Rourke like me to do? Picket the courtroom?

fn1. Incidentally, let’s not pussyfoot around about who’s to blame here. The jerks in question are the Southern Poverty Law Center, District Judge Myron Thompson, the Alabama Supreme Court, Alabama’s Court of the Judiciary, and every single judge except Moore who touched this stupid case in any capacity. I hope that they are all ashamed of themselves.

fn2. “The jerks have begun praising marriage lately. But only if the bride and groom each have a beard.” P.J. O’Rourke, channelling Ann Coulter. Shamefully hackish.

Following a lead from Bill Gardner (and a tip from Henry) I’ve been reading The Status Syndrome : How Social Standing Affects Our Health and Longevity by Michael Marmot[1]. The core of Marmot’s book, which is fascinating in itself is his empirical work showing that, as you move up any kind of hierarchy (Marmot looked at British civil servants) your health status improves. I’ve done a little bit of work myself relating to the links between health, education and life expectancy at the national level, and Marmot’s micro findings fit very neatly with mine.

What’s even more interesting though (to me and to Bill, I think) is the general idea of autonomy as a source of good health[2]. He debunks, for example, the long-discredited, but still widely-believed notion of executive stress and shows that the more control you have over your work environment and your life in general, the less likely you are to suffer the classic stress-related illnesses, such as heart disease.

It seems to me that autonomy, or something like it, is at the root of many of the concerns commonly seen as part of notions like freedom, security and democratic participation. I’m still struggling with this, but reading Marmot has crystallised some thoughts I’ve had for a long time. I’ve put some thoughts over the page – comments appreciated.

[click to continue…]

On Thursday night I watched “Yasmin”:http://uk.imdb.com/title/tt0420333/?fr=c2l0ZT11a3xteD0yMHxzZz0xfGxtPTIwMHx0dD1vbnxwbj0wfHE9WWFzbWlufGh0bWw9MXxubT1vbg__;fc=1;ft=75;fm=1 , a movie by Kenneth Glenaan with a script by Full Monty author Simon Beaufoy. A somewhat didactic film dealing with the pressures on Muslims in the north of England since 9/11, it was on TV partly because it has failed to secure distribution to cinemas in the UK (or, I believe, North America). The film centres on the life of the eponymous heroine (played by “Archie Punjabi”:http://uk.imdb.com/name/nm0659544/ ), who lives a life split beween assimilation (changing out of hijab as soon as she’s safely out the door, flirting with workmates, driving a Golf GTi, going to the pub) and conformity (hijab in her community, arranged marriage to distant relative who wants to get British nationality, deference to patriarchal father). Patriarchal father is, however, a basically good man struggling to adapt to modernity; whereas gansta-rap, bling-sporting, drug-dealing (discount for a blowjob) brother is angry and alienated.

[click to continue…]

Longtime readers will remember that there was quite an active debate a few months ago on the subject of Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the fundamentalist imam, and his visit to London. There have been a few developments since then. Ken Livingstone (mayor of London, for our non-UK readers) has produced a dossier justifying his decision to share a platform with Qaradawi, out of the apparent belief that this is in some way a substitute for meeting the crowds of outraged Londonders who thought he shouldn’t have. Harry’s Place has a lot of material on whether or not this dossier cuts the mustard; they think it doesn’t.

On a number of issues; apologism for suicide bombers, advocacy of killing gays, wife-beating, etc, it seems pretty clear that Qaradawi is possessed of some fairly horrible reactionary views. This isn’t much of a surprise; to be honest, it was free information which could simply be read off the fact that he is a fundamentalist imam. But Ken’s dossier does contain one important point.

That is, that the particular offence which caused us at CT to come off the fence and condemn him – a statement that it was OK or even required for jihadis to kidnap Western civilians in Iraq – is a statement which Qaradawi denies ever having made. In general, while I can’t emphasise enough that he is not someone who I would ever like to see gaining influence in the UK, Qaradawi appears to have repeatedly, consistently, and at some personal cost, maintained the view that fundamentalist Islam does not impose any duty of violent jihad against the West, and that killing infidel civilians is wrong. This raises a quite important issue as to what kind of fundamentalist Muslim we need to be talking to (I’m trying to talk in general terms here to avoid issues specifically related to Qaradawi; I am not yet sure whether his view on suicide bombers is just the general apologism common throughout the Arab Middle East or something more virulent).

There’s a lot of debate in the Harry’s Place comment threads that I’m not going to try to summarise here, but below the fold is the text of an email I sent to the editors (I was having a bit of technical trouble so I decided to summarise my views in an email. I think it makes sense as a standalone, but you’ll probably need to read this to see what I mean by “David makes a good case”).

[click to continue…]

The “True Cross is coming to Tucson!”:http://www.dailystar.com/dailystar/dailystar/56896.php

bq. The [“Relics of the Passion”] exhibit is part of a six-state tour that will take place during Lent. The eight relics include what are believed to be remains from Jesus’ crown of thorns, a piece of exterior wrapping from the Shroud of Turin that some say was Jesus’ burial sheet, and a sliver from the cross used to crucify him. A replica of one of the nails used to hang Christ on the cross also will be part of the display. Though it’s not an actual nail used in the crucifixion, organizers say it’s made from shavings of some nails that were.

bq. “Certainly, if people saw the movie, now it’s time to venerate the relics,” said tour organizer Richard Jeffrey, past state deputy for the Arizona Knights of Columbus …

I wonder how much they’ll be charging people to see them. If it’s cheap enough, I’ll have to go along. The tour is being organized by the “Apostolate For Holy Relics”:http://www.apostolateforholyrelics.com/home.php, an organization based not in the Vatican City, but out of a “Post Office Box in Los Angeles”:http://www.apostolateforholyrelics.com/contact.php. You can save yourself a trip and “see photos of the relics”:http://www.apostolateforholyrelics.com/ahr-projects/passion-tour/relic.php on the AFHP’s website, though mostly you just see the reliquaries of the relics.