« January 2008 | Main | March 2008 »
February 29, 2008
Now for Your Hit Parade
Call it "Pissing Strange." It's not the rock musical "Passing Strange," which just opened on Broadway to crix raves. And it's not with Snooky Lanson, either. Mother Jones magazine calls it "The Torture Playlist" -- a k a the top songs used on detainees in American military prisons "to induce sleep deprivation," to "prolong capture shock," and to "drown out screams."
Listen here or here:
Aiiieeee!! Click the play/pause button to stop the damn sound!
Posted by jherman at 9:59 AM
February 27, 2008
Is Ralph a Spoiler? Or Are We a Banana Republic?
The day after CNN reported that "Nader takes steps towards another White House bid," I had an exchange -- it was a month ago -- with Henry Kisor, an old friend from former years at the Chicago Sun-Times. Citing that report, I said in a comment on one of Henry's blogposts, None of the above, "Go, Ralph, Go!"
The rest of the exchange went like this:
Henry said,
January 31, 2008 at 10:58 am
It's a good thing that Nader admits that he's a minor candidate, the representative of a fringe. But it is appalling that he refuses to admit (maybe even to understand) that a candidacy such as his can result in the election of the worst alternative. He makes his point, but the rest of us have to live with the results.
Jan Herman said,
January 31, 2008 at 12:01 pm
If Nader does run, and if the contest between the two major candidates is close enough for him to actually be a spoiler, then we who have to live with the results will get what we deserve.
Henry said,
January 31, 2008 at 12:05 pm
And we got what we deserved because Ralph ran? I don't see the logic there.
Jan Herman said,
January 31, 2008 at 12:51 pm
That's not what I mean at all. I don't believe Ralph was the spoiler in 2000. Gore should have won going away. It wasn't Ralph that stopped him. There were many other, too many other, factors involved to blame that catastrophe on him. The Supreme Court, for one. What I'm saying is that the upcoming election shouldn't be close enough for him to be a spoiler.(If McCain is the Republican nominee, the electorate ought to reject him overwhelmingly for, among other things, his war-mongering triumphalism. And if it's Romney, it ought to reject him overwhelmingly for, among other things, his democracy-needs-religion crapola. If the Democrats don't win by a landslide against either of them, it will show just how much of a Banana Republic we've become.)
Then, on Feb. 26, Nader announced on "Meet the Press" that he will run, and yesterday NY Times columnist Bob Herbert wrote:
When asked about the possibility of being a spoiler, of tilting the election to John McCain, Mr. Nader replied: "Not a chance. If the Democrats can't landslide the Republicans this year, they ought to just wrap up, close down, emerge in a different form."
Herbert, who obviously admires Nader, gently but firmly rebukes him: "He won't countenance the idea that there might be something destructive about his candidacy."
Well, have a look at a video clip of Nader's statement. It's only three minutes long and gives his full reply. See whether Nader makes sense or if he is, as his critics claim, merely an overweaning egotist who can't resist putting himself at the center of public attention.
Prefer to read what Nader said without having to watching an ad on the way to the video? Or because you're deaf and NBC, like all the networks and all the Internet sites for news or entertainment, fails to offer audio captioning? Here's the text of the full reply to Tim Russert, excerpted from a transcript of the program:
MR. RUSSERT: Will you run for president as an independent in 2008?MR. NADER: Let me put it in context, to make it a little more palatable to people who have closed minds. Twenty-four percent of the American people are satisfied with the state of the country, according to Gallup. That's about the lowest ranking ever. Sixty-one percent think both major parties are failing. And, according to Frank Luntz's poll, a Republican, 80 percent would consider voting for a independent this year. Now, you take that framework of people feeling locked out, shut, shut out, marginalized, disrespected and you go from Iraq to Palestine/Israel, from Enron to Wall Street, from Katrina to the bungling of the Bush administration, to the complicity of the Democrats in not stopping him on the war, stopping him on the tax cuts, getting a decent energy bill through, and you have to ask yourself, as a citizen, should we elaborate the issues that the two are not talking about? And the--all, all the candidates--McCain, Obama and Clinton--are against single payer health insurance, full Medicare for all. I'm for it, as well as millions of Americans and 59 percent of physicians in a forthcoming poll this April. People don't like Pentagon waste, a bloated military budget, all the reports in the press and in the GAO reports. A wasteful defense is a weak defense. It takes away taxpayer money that can go to the necessities of the American people. That's off the table to Obama and Clinton and McCain.
The issue of labor law reform, repealing the notorious Taft-Hartley Act that keeps workers who are now more defenseless than ever against corporate globalization from organizing to defend their interests. Cracking down on corporate crime. The media--the mainstream media repeatedly indicating how trillions of dollars have been drained and fleeced and looted from millions of workers and investors who don't have many rights these days, and pensioners. You know, when you see the paralysis of the government, when you see Washington, D.C., be corporate-occupied territory, every department agency controlled by overwhelming presence of corporate lobbyists, corporate executives in high government positions, turning the government against its own people, you--one feels an obligation, Tim, to try to open the doorways, to try to get better ballot access, to respect dissent in America in the terms of third parties and, and independent candidates; to recognize historically that great issues have come in our history against slavery and women rights to vote and worker and farmer progressives, through little parties that never ran--won any national election. Dissent is the mother of ascent. And in that context, I have decided to run for president.
Continuing right along from the text transcript, which is on this video clip:
MR. RUSSERT: As you know, Ralph Nader, they'll be Democrats all across the country who are going to find this very disturbing news, and they'll point again to 2000. This was the vote count. Al Gore winning the popular vote, but you've got 2.7 percent, nearly three million votes, in 2000. Then Florida, Florida, Florida. As you remember, George Bush won Florida by 537 votes. You've got 97,488. Democrat after Democrat says to this day, Ralph Nader, if your name had not been on that ballot, Al Gore would've carried Florida. Exit polls show he would've carried Nader voters 2-to-1. Gore would've been president and not George Bush. You, Ralph Nader are responsible for what has happened the last seven years.MR. NADER: Not, not George Bush? Not the Democrats in Congress? Not the voters who voted for George Bush? But there were Democrats in Florida, 250,000 of them. You know, I wish we'd have Al Gore on this program someday Tim and ask him, "Why did you not become president in 2000?" And I think what he's going to tell you is he thought he did win Florida, but it was taken from him before, during and after the election from Tallahassee. Katherine Bush -- you know the secretary of the state...
MR. RUSSERT: Katherine Harris.
MR. NADER: Harris, rather, and Jeb Bush, all the way to that terribly politicized Supreme Court decision. But the, the political bigotry that's involved here is that we shouldn't enter the electoral arena? We, all of us who, who, who think that the country needs an infusion of freedom, democracy, choice, dissent should just sit on the sidelines and watch the two parties own all the voters and turn the government over to big business? What's really important here is, if you want to look at it analytically, is there--Mr. Gore would, would tell you if he won Tennessee, anything else being equal, he would've been president. It's his home state. If he won Arkansas, everything else being equal, he would've been president. The mayor of Miami sabotaged the Democrats because of a grudge, didn't bring thousands of votes out. Quarter of a million Democrats voted for Bush in Florida. There is all kinds of thievery in Florida.
So why do they blame the Greens? Why do they blame the people all over the country who are trying to have a progressive platform, not just the environment. What was their crime? Why, why, why isn't there tolerance for candidates' rights the way there is a building tolerance over the last 50 years for voter rights? Because without voter rights, candidate rights don't mean much. And without candidate rights--more voices and choices -- voter rights don't mean much. I -- I'm amazed at the liberal intelligencia here. They are analytic and they deal with all kinds of variables, but when it comes to 2000 election, it's just one variable.
And I might add that Solon Simmons and other scholars -- he teaches at George Mason -- have shown that by pushing Gore to take more progressive stands, he got more votes than the votes he allegedly -- were withdrawn from for the Green party. Twenty-five percent of my vote, according to a Democratic pollster, exit poll, would've gone to Bush. Thirty-nine percent would've gone to Gore and the rest would've stayed home. Every major -- every third party in Florida got more votes than the 537 vote gap. So let's get over it and try to have a diverse multiple choice, multiple party democracy the way they have in Western Europe and Canada. This bit of, of spoiler is really very astonishing. These are the two parties who've spoiled our electoral system, money, they can't even count the votes, they steal--the Republicans steal the votes, and the Democrats knock third party candidates off the ballot. That's their specialty these days.
And now -- for the sake of completeness -- the text (coming about three minutes into this video clip) cited by Bob Herbert:
MR. RUSSERT: How would you feel, however, if Ralph Nader's presence on the ballot tilted Florida or Ohio to John McCain and McCain became president, and Barack Obama, the first African-American who had been nominated by the Democratic Party -- this is hypothetical -- did not become a president and people turned to you and said, "Nader, you've done it again"?MR. NADER: Not a chance. If the Democrats can't landslide the Republicans this year, they ought to just wrap up, close down, emerge in a different form. You think the American people are going to vote for a pro-war John McCain who almost gives an indication that he's the candidate of perpetual war, perpetual intervention overseas? You think they're going to vote for a Republican like McCain, who allies himself with the criminal, recidivistic regime of George Bush and Dick Cheney, the most multipliable impeachable presidency in American history? Many leading members of the bar, including the former head of the American Bar Association, Michael Greco, absolutely dismayed over the violations of the Constitution, our federal laws, the criminal, illegal war in Iraq and the occupation? There's no way. That's why we have to take this opportunity to have a much broader debate on the issues that relate to the American people, as, as, as a fellow in Long Island said recently, Mr. Sloane, he said, "These parties aren't speaking to me. They're not speaking to my problems, to my family's problems."
So, yeah. "Go, Ralph, Go!"
Postscript: "Well. I'd say, 'Go back, Ralph, go back!'" (Henry's riposte. And, he insists, "Waving my arms wildly, too.")
Posted by jherman at 9:29 AM
February 20, 2008
Milton Glaser ♥ Information, Not Persuasion
The 79-year-old graphic designer perhaps most famous for creating the I♥NY logo had a dose of surprising advice last week for the propagandists among us -- the marketers, advertisers, public-relations spinners and, yes, journalists -- along with citizens at large facing an onslaught of political campaigns.
It is "essential for us all to question all the beliefs we cherish," Milton Glaser said in his keynote speech to a daylong 'ganda bash, "Where the Truth Lies," organized by the School of Visual Arts with The Graduate Center, CUNY. "Beliefs must be held lightly because certainty can be the enemy of truth."
Propaganda "substitutes an alien authority for our own perception," he said, adding that "the intersection of fear and persuasion has created the world as we know it" and that we are faced with a "constant and relentless subversion of what is real."
Art is the antidote, Glaser asserted. "Art may be the only truth we can ever know," he said. Through art, "what is real becomes visible." Thus, he takes as his touchstone the words of the poet Horace: "The purpose of art is to inform and delight." Notice, he said, that "Horace did not say persuade and delight."
Furthermore, "art is a survival mechanism for the human species," Glaser noted. "Otherwise it would not have lasted this long." He cited the Lascaux cave paintings of prehistoric times to bolster his point.
In addition to the advice that peppered his speech, Glaser showed slides of some of his work. One, displaying a set of buttons created for The Nation magazine, was called "The Purple Coalition" -- as opposed to red or blue -- and it doesn't seem to have worked yet. It offered the following epigrams, one to a button, and a few more:
Principles not politics
Strength not stubbornness
Justice not junkets
Patriotism not ideology
Cooperation not corruption
Truth not spin
Openness not secrecy
Negotiation not intervention
Jobs not pay-offs
Civility not mudslinging
Voting rights not voter fraud
Security not torture
Civil rights not surveillance
Competence not cronyism
Leadership not devisiveness
Facts not fear
Another slide, titled "Goodbye," displayed four buttons with two characters each -- IM PE AC H! -- and a caption that said: "Help send the president on his way with this new four-button set." Sadly, given the results so far, that too is one of Glaser's less persuasive -- or to use his term, informative -- designs.
Postscript: A reader writes, "Pretty good, save for the fact that Patriotism IS Ideology -- often at its most pernicious." Exactly right. Every time someone raises the banner of patriotism, I cringe.
PPS: On Feb. 22 The Nation magazine posted the text of Glaser's presentation. Go here: "Art and Propaganda".
Posted by jherman at 9:49 AM
February 17, 2008
May We Remind You?
In "The War That Isn't," his latest column in National Journal, William Powers notes, "It's not at all unusual lately to pick up a large metropolitan newspaper and find that there is nothing -- zero -- on the front page about a war in which nearly 4,000 Americans have died." (Let alone the tens of thousands wounded. Or the hundreds of thousands of dead or wounded Iraqis and the millions forced to flee.)
Not to worry. Unless you agree with George C. Wilson, whose article in Army Times and other military publications, "Vietnam Redux," points out, "Now, as then, [the] generals are leading us down the primrose path." But this kind of news, as Powers says, "gets lost in the noise of other news." You know: "Obama and the Clintons. The mortgage crisis. Sports. The Hollywood writers' strike. The Clintons. The weather. Obama. Celebrities in trouble. Obama. Your health."
Postscript: An inherent part of genocide is to deny that people have died. Read "Counting Iraqi Casualties -- and a Media Controversy," about "the war's exceptional human costs" and the smear campaign to deny them. It is a devastating indictment of the American press -- and National Journal and The Wall Street Journal in particular -- by John Tirman, the executive director and a principle research scientist at M.I.T.'s Center for International Studies. Tirman commissioned the survey published in the British medical journal, the Lancet, in October 2006, that concluded that 600,000 Iraqis died during the first 40 months of the war.
Posted by jherman at 9:08 AM
February 13, 2008
'Ganda Bash
Big all-day propaganda conference coming up in midtown Madhattan: "Where the Truth Lies." Keynoter: Milton Glaser. He asks, per the press release, "Is there any difference between good propaganda and bad propaganda?" Put another way, "Where does truth end and 'spin' begin?"
Topics include: How American Presidents Persuade the Public to Go to War. "It is not war that Americans hate, but, rather, unsuccessful wars," says Eugene Secunda, a marketing and media prof at NYU, per the release. He explains why a majority of Americans "are more than willing to buy a war if it is properly packaged and skillfully marketed."
How about this one? Learning from Las Vegas. "Progressives continue to depend upon sober reason to guide them," says Stephen Duncombe, a political activist and NYU prof. He believes they need to adopt a "spectacular vernacular" without adopting Vegas values. (Paul Krassner, anyone?) And this: The Changing Face of Consumer Marketing. "Sam Travis Ewen -- the man behind the LED light boards that prompted officials to shut down Boston last year -- has some answers." (Abbie Hoffman, anyone?)
Here's a cutie: Your Consumer is Revolting. With a serious subtitle: The History of Rumor Control in American Marketing. "American corporations and government entities have long attempted to monitor, control and influence word-of-mouth communication in order to align it with their own interests." The marketing exec who "led all communication research for Procter & Gamble," per the press release, "will survey the development of rumor control, as the process is known, and the marketing industry's recent response to mass adoption of the Internet."
There's plenty more: Why You Can Trust Comment and Opinion More Than News, also Corporations in the Classroom, and an advance screening of clips from a 10-hour PBS documentary, "Carrier," about life on the USS Nimitz during a six-month deployment to the Persian Gulf.
The conference, moderated by David Brancaccio, is being presented by the School of Visual Arts (SVA) in collaboration with the PhD Programs in History and Sociology of the Graduate Center, CUNY. It begins Friday (Feb. 15) at 9 a.m. and runs through 4 p.m. Place: 365 Fifth Ave. (btwn 34th & 35th Streets), in the Baisley Powell Elebash Recital Hall, GC CUNY. $35 (general admission); $20 (students). Tel: 212.592.2200.
Posted by jherman at 9:50 AM
February 11, 2008
Our Subprime War
Whenever I read or hear about the success of the surge, I substitute the phrase bribes to the tribes. Those four little words make a world of difference, and they go back a long way -- viz. "Protection Payments" made to Tribes in Ottoman Gaza (1519-1582) -- but you don't see them often enough in news accounts of the Iraq war.
Nor do you hear the President With His Head Up His Ass boasting about our bribes to the tribes. He brags instead, as he did the other day, about "the surge of forces." Even a lengthy report that broke the news of the new Army operations manual on counterinsurgency, revised after the "hard-won lessons" of Afghanistan and Iraq, fails to mention bribery. It speaks instead about the importance of street patrols.
Maybe when the revised operations manual is made public later this month, we'll see the inclusion of a new doctrinal tactic to formalize what has already happened: "Bring lotsa cash to buy off the enemy, especially in ten-million-dollar bricks."
(Hmmm, thanks to Fred Kaplan at Slate, I see that the manual has already been posted in a huge pdf file by Secrecy News. Downloading the 314-page manual-- it's 28 MB -- is guaranteed to freeze your browser for a while. But I managed, and a quick glance through the pages indicates that bribing insurgents is not mentioned anywhere.)
A weapons analyst I know can't understand why "the press lays off all this stuff. It scrubs everything clean, sanitizes it, and presents it in the best possible light. If this were a Democratic president overseeing strategy, he would be ripped apart. We have a real scandal. It's not Whitewater. It's something at the highest level of national security."
In fairness, I have to point out that it's not as if bribes to the tribes have gone unnoticed. Not too long ago, the BBC reported, as did others, that the payoffs have made al-Qaeda's Ayman al-Zawahiri very unhappy. (Scroll way down.) And they were mentioned in passing only yesterday by NYT reporter Alissa J. Rubin. She noted that groups paid by the American military "to fight Islamic extremists" in Iraq's Anbar Province "have mostly seemed to be cooperating," although recently "their behavior has been [um] problematic."
Meaning, of course, that bribes notwithstanding they'd rather put their own interests ahead of ours and others'. Now ain't that a surprise.
Posted by jherman at 10:10 AM
February 8, 2008
Burros Roam Free
Just back from a trip to Arizona, where I met a herd of typical McCain voters wandering through the business district of Oatman, a former mining town that evokes the Old West with the aura if not quite the flair of a Wile E. Coyote cartoon. This voter was about to enter the polling booth at a local hotel. (In case you're wondering, the sign says, "Public restrooms are across and down the street.⇒") And here's a closeup of the leaders of the herd:
Posted by jherman at 9:42 AM