Reader Comments from The Fray:
Greatest unread bestsellers? A Brief History of Time isn't a bad choice, but how about Umberto Eco's Foucault's Pendulum? Great book, hardly read by any of the apparent thousands who bought it. Oh, and, um, "Gore Gore Gore Bush Bush Bush God God God Gay Gay Gay": Monty just wants to fit in.
--Monty
(To reply, click
here.)
[Notes from the Fray Editor: The first part refers to Friday's entry (though to us at The Fray they are not unread). The second part...well, on Monday this poster came to read about Tony Blair, stayed to talk about gay behavior and sparked a thread that followed on nicely from last week's Breakfast Table, lasted all week, covered many subjects, but almost spookily avoided any topic from this week's actual Breakfast Table entries. So we'll forget them, and particularly posts entitled "Two, two mints in one" and "The Eternal Conga Line".
On-topic contributions included our own eye-witness report from Prague--see George Cerny, below--and a provocative post on eugenics. Simon Parker, who says he is a Leftist for Literary Integrity, thinks Lynn Cheney's book sounds like "an Ayn Rand Western". And Roger Sweeny (here) and Kal Bi (here) both think that letting dictators get away can save lives: "Pinochet gave up power because he had engineered a cushy retirement. Would it have been better if he had stayed?"
Allan Allport has more details about that traditional phrase Bob's Your Uncle (though he didn't admit that we don't actually use it with one another in England, we save it to delight Americans). And what can Peter Nixon mean, "Will no-one rid me of these turbulent Brits?" N/t, no clue. Or have we? Key Fray player A.G.Android has something to say--be afraid, BT writers:]
From Wednesday's entry: "Still, I found Gore's sweat rather endearing: like the moment in those science fiction films when you discover that the android is capable of crying real tears."
Well, thank you very much for a typical anti-cyborg stereotype. But now that you've discovered that Gore is one of us, you'll be receiving a visit.... Don't bother to pack.
--A.G.Android
(To reply, click
here.)
[Reaction to
Monday's entry]
Schadenfreude has never been an issue in American politics until after the fact. I doubt it has ever been an issue in the UK either. What is an issue is EV (Entertainment Value), and the polls are the Nielsen Ratings for the candidates. My exposure towards Tony Blair has been through the Prime Minister's Questions on C-Span, and he has been very entertaining till late. He needs new material. Mr Hague's clumsiness and dull wit are now more entertaining because he is as vapid as Fred Flintstone, something I failed to appreciate before. The same is true in the U.S. A long juicy kiss is high EV (apparently, but I can't imagine why) and Liebermann's Jewish jokes are great to be aired. But they too need new material. Dubya, on the other hand, continues to surprise and entertain with his wonderful malapropisms and ability to speak for five minutes without the need of a subject, verb, or direct object. Dubya has a genius that few can match.
--cef
(To reply, click
here.)
[Reaction to
Tuesday's entry:]
We read: "The tragedy is that today's mass middle class has been far too rich for too long to understand not just that free trade brings prosperity, but that its opposite brings both economic misery and political chaos in its wake."
Nonsense. This statement is demonstrably false. Almost every country that is rich today got wealthy not by adopting free trade, but by adopting its opposite. The recipe to wealth, as demonstrated by the UK, the U.S., Japan, South Korea, and many others, is to do the reverse of everything demanded of developing countries by the IMF, World Bank, and WTO: create high trade barriers to protect and develop domestic industries; do not respect patent rights belonging to other countries; limit the ability of your own citizens to buy from abroad to items you're not interested in making at home, limit the ability of foreigners to own your assets. Once a country has a serious lead, it is then in the interest of that country to have "free trade", because "free trade" tends to turn small advantages into larger ones. Less efficient producers, rather than having time to learn to be more efficient, collapse under the competition. Capital moves freely across borders, but workers can't move as easily if at all. There's a race to the bottom as desperate workers struggle for the crumbs. Globalization in some form is inevitable, but the form preferred by the Economist magazine will not be successfully imposed on the world. There will be increasing violence until serious reforms are adopted. Debt forgiveness is not a separate matter, it's all of a piece.
--Joe Buck
(To reply, or to read a longer version of this post, click
here.)
[Reaction to
Wednesday's entry:]
From Prague: Being in the middle of the protests, I've come to understand the anti-globalization movement rather better, even though I am a free-trader and limit my disdain for McDonald's to not eating there. Globalization is, for the protestors, really a marketing term. There is a wide variety of issues (the environment, debt relief, industrialization, etc) which are lumped together under the name. While debt relief is an important issue, it was also an important issue twenty years ago. How to put something like this in the public eye and on the policy agenda? The news media is like a cat, responding only to sudden movement. Absent something to play with, it goes to sleep. What Seattle made clear was that protests, the more chaotic the better, could change that, even if they alienate some by their extremism and violence. In Prague, the anti-globalization movement, "protest nation" if you will, seems on its last legs. The violence came after they were frustrated at disrupting the IMF conference itself, so they turned their attention to the McDonald's and such. Also, it should be remembered that the appeal of this rioting is not largely ideological. While I don't recommend it, it is a great deal of fun to run through exploding cans of tear gas and be chased by riot police. Last night I felt weirdly alive, and began laughing hysterically after I got caught in a police charge. It is a pastime of youth with a political veneer that justifies what is really thrill-seeking.
I should add that the estimate of 20,000 protestors is wildly inflated. More like 5,000.
--George Cerny
(To reply, click
here.)
Re: eugenics. I am not an adherent to this type of program, especially when run by anyone in particular. However, the other day I was seeing patients in a hospital which I consult at and had an interesting conversation with some other healthcare staff about the obligation of people to remove their poor genes from the pool. The concept was detestable to one fellow who remarked, "yes, but what about a cure coming out after you have had yourself sterilized?" I was struck by the blind faith in science and the apparent arrogant assumption that one is entitled to breed. No matter you may be afflicted with diseases like diabetes, Huntington's chorea, or other known disorders which markedly impair life quality and quantity, but you choose as well to provide a very poor legacy for your progeny. The thought of personal responsibility involving my genes and the incumbent racial responsibility I bear to those humans who come after me is not PC I am sure, but needs to be discussed. I am saddened each time I deal with a person whose life is so much less because of the complacency, self centeredness, or even ignorance of their parents vis a vis choosing to produce defective offspring (and yes I know it isn't always a choice).
--Robert Ball
(To reply, click
here.)
(9/29)
PRINT
DISCUSS
E-MAIL
RSS
RECOMMEND...
Facebook
MySpace
Mixx
Digg
Reddit
del.icio.us
Furl
Ma.gnolia
Sphere
StumbleUpon
Why Is Obama Always Talking About "False Choices"?
The Lovely Bones: Peter Jackson's Attempt To Show Us Heaven
Is It Practical To Kill Someone by Boiling Him in Lye?
Justice Stevens Is the Court's Last WASP. Should Obama Replace Him With Another One?
How Exactly Do They Measure Snowfall? With a Ruler?
Slate's Music Club: Stop Calling Rihanna Vacuous
Reader Comments from The Fray:
Greatest unread bestsellers? A Brief History of Time isn't a bad choice, but how about Umberto Eco's Foucault's Pendulum? Great book, hardly read by any of the apparent thousands who bought it. Oh, and, um, "Gore Gore Gore Bush Bush Bush God God God Gay Gay Gay": Monty just wants to fit in.
--Monty
(To reply, click here.)
[Notes from the Fray Editor: The first part refers to Friday's entry (though to us at The Fray they are not unread). The second part...well, on Monday this poster came to read about Tony Blair, stayed to talk about gay behavior and sparked a thread that followed on nicely from last week's Breakfast Table, lasted all week, covered many subjects, but almost spookily avoided any topic from this week's actual Breakfast Table entries. So we'll forget them, and particularly posts entitled "Two, two mints in one" and "The Eternal Conga Line".
On-topic contributions included our own eye-witness report from Prague--see George Cerny, below--and a provocative post on eugenics. Simon Parker, who says he is a Leftist for Literary Integrity, thinks Lynn Cheney's book sounds like "an Ayn Rand Western". And Roger Sweeny (here) and Kal Bi (here) both think that letting dictators get away can save lives: "Pinochet gave up power because he had engineered a cushy retirement. Would it have been better if he had stayed?"
Allan Allport has more details about that traditional phrase Bob's Your Uncle (though he didn't admit that we don't actually use it with one another in England, we save it to delight Americans). And what can Peter Nixon mean, "Will no-one rid me of these turbulent Brits?" N/t, no clue. Or have we? Key Fray player A.G.Android has something to say--be afraid, BT writers:]
From Wednesday's entry: "Still, I found Gore's sweat rather endearing: like the moment in those science fiction films when you discover that the android is capable of crying real tears."
Well, thank you very much for a typical anti-cyborg stereotype. But now that you've discovered that Gore is one of us, you'll be receiving a visit.... Don't bother to pack.
--A.G.Android
(To reply, click here.)
[Reaction to Monday's entry]
Schadenfreude has never been an issue in American politics until after the fact. I doubt it has ever been an issue in the UK either. What is an issue is EV (Entertainment Value), and the polls are the Nielsen Ratings for the candidates. My exposure towards Tony Blair has been through the Prime Minister's Questions on C-Span, and he has been very entertaining till late. He needs new material. Mr Hague's clumsiness and dull wit are now more entertaining because he is as vapid as Fred Flintstone, something I failed to appreciate before. The same is true in the U.S. A long juicy kiss is high EV (apparently, but I can't imagine why) and Liebermann's Jewish jokes are great to be aired. But they too need new material. Dubya, on the other hand, continues to surprise and entertain with his wonderful malapropisms and ability to speak for five minutes without the need of a subject, verb, or direct object. Dubya has a genius that few can match.
--cef
(To reply, click here.)
[Reaction to Tuesday's entry:]
We read: "The tragedy is that today's mass middle class has been far too rich for too long to understand not just that free trade brings prosperity, but that its opposite brings both economic misery and political chaos in its wake."
Nonsense. This statement is demonstrably false. Almost every country that is rich today got wealthy not by adopting free trade, but by adopting its opposite. The recipe to wealth, as demonstrated by the UK, the U.S., Japan, South Korea, and many others, is to do the reverse of everything demanded of developing countries by the IMF, World Bank, and WTO: create high trade barriers to protect and develop domestic industries; do not respect patent rights belonging to other countries; limit the ability of your own citizens to buy from abroad to items you're not interested in making at home, limit the ability of foreigners to own your assets. Once a country has a serious lead, it is then in the interest of that country to have "free trade", because "free trade" tends to turn small advantages into larger ones. Less efficient producers, rather than having time to learn to be more efficient, collapse under the competition. Capital moves freely across borders, but workers can't move as easily if at all. There's a race to the bottom as desperate workers struggle for the crumbs. Globalization in some form is inevitable, but the form preferred by the Economist magazine will not be successfully imposed on the world. There will be increasing violence until serious reforms are adopted. Debt forgiveness is not a separate matter, it's all of a piece.
--Joe Buck
(To reply, or to read a longer version of this post, click here.)
[Reaction to Wednesday's entry:]
From Prague: Being in the middle of the protests, I've come to understand the anti-globalization movement rather better, even though I am a free-trader and limit my disdain for McDonald's to not eating there. Globalization is, for the protestors, really a marketing term. There is a wide variety of issues (the environment, debt relief, industrialization, etc) which are lumped together under the name. While debt relief is an important issue, it was also an important issue twenty years ago. How to put something like this in the public eye and on the policy agenda? The news media is like a cat, responding only to sudden movement. Absent something to play with, it goes to sleep. What Seattle made clear was that protests, the more chaotic the better, could change that, even if they alienate some by their extremism and violence. In Prague, the anti-globalization movement, "protest nation" if you will, seems on its last legs. The violence came after they were frustrated at disrupting the IMF conference itself, so they turned their attention to the McDonald's and such. Also, it should be remembered that the appeal of this rioting is not largely ideological. While I don't recommend it, it is a great deal of fun to run through exploding cans of tear gas and be chased by riot police. Last night I felt weirdly alive, and began laughing hysterically after I got caught in a police charge. It is a pastime of youth with a political veneer that justifies what is really thrill-seeking.
I should add that the estimate of 20,000 protestors is wildly inflated. More like 5,000.
--George Cerny
(To reply, click here.)
Re: eugenics. I am not an adherent to this type of program, especially when run by anyone in particular. However, the other day I was seeing patients in a hospital which I consult at and had an interesting conversation with some other healthcare staff about the obligation of people to remove their poor genes from the pool. The concept was detestable to one fellow who remarked, "yes, but what about a cure coming out after you have had yourself sterilized?" I was struck by the blind faith in science and the apparent arrogant assumption that one is entitled to breed. No matter you may be afflicted with diseases like diabetes, Huntington's chorea, or other known disorders which markedly impair life quality and quantity, but you choose as well to provide a very poor legacy for your progeny. The thought of personal responsibility involving my genes and the incumbent racial responsibility I bear to those humans who come after me is not PC I am sure, but needs to be discussed. I am saddened each time I deal with a person whose life is so much less because of the complacency, self centeredness, or even ignorance of their parents vis a vis choosing to produce defective offspring (and yes I know it isn't always a choice).
--Robert Ball
(To reply, click here.)
(9/29)