Another review of 'Charlie Is My Darling' - Ireland in 1965.

While the television special on the Rolling Stones in Ireland (Belfast and Dublin tour in 1965 – “Charlie Is My Darling”) has appeared a number of times on television lately when I have turned on the set, the footage as edited, produced and presented about the music of these five, very talented people (Mick Jagger, Brian Jones, Charlie Watts, Ron Wood, and Bill Wyman,) who waited significantly behind “The Beatles” to arrive on the music scene in America, shows all the musical and iconic power of the captivating stuff they produced when they were young and playing smaller venues.  These five young people, when they started out were completely healthy, and were very solid people built up to stand the test of time in the tenacious and tough world of what was then the modern media and the world of music; and this in view of a much tougher media climate today.  In the rough world where this musical group was built, the musicians that made up the “Rolling Stones” were unlikely to ever have had problems, past, present and future, and in fact, even those among their detractors would be hard – pressed to propose whenever these people had any trouble whatsoever; people refrain even from wondering about it due to the stature of the group and what they represent as greater personal, even revolutionary, freedoms for their audiences, including the rights of women who apparently swarmed around them at their events and in life as well.  Never a problem, and despite the idea as proposed at the time that the “Stones” had little better possibility given “The Beatles” act than being a broken record in England and Belgium, they excelled in their performances and caught the attention of listeners in America and Europe everywhere, and probably even in places where their music was taboo, like the Far East or South America, etc. 

 

What went into the level of success of “The Rolling Stones” might have to do with the social upheavals and chaos of their early years on, and somehow this rock group’s handling of its issues:  It is possible, if not probable all the main characters in a sketch of this group, especially after the unfortunate passing of Brian Jones as replaced by Ron Wood, understood in depth and were informed of the issues of the day – including even things like abortion and taxes.  Unlike “The Beatles,” the “Stones” probably read the papers and /or listened to events over the radio and watched them on television.  They have had an image as businesslike and responsible radicals if anything, whereas “The Beatles” were always diving into deep water with the latest artistic, societal, social, moral and ethical, and other avant – garde themes, including world popular movements and politics.  “The Beatles” and other musical groups of the day quite often took on large themes and questions beyond the scope of popular music that dulled their lyrics and in the end might have caused their album sales to fall, and the group itself then lost its cohesion, artistically and legally.  On the other hand, there is an invaluable picture of “The Rolling Stones” in the mind of every one of their generation of taking on the challenges of youth along with its strengths and dilemmas, answering to society for the kinds of upsetting new thinking that marks their age, the arrival of show business in every room of one’s house and the related influences of the mass media, publicity, radically changing modern tastes and the finances related to this.   “The Rolling Stones” were perhaps better at the recipes of music in the media cookbook than other groups, especially with the range of themes in their music that could make a deep impression on admirers of folk music, to classical and blues or harder rock lovers whereas “The Beatles,” who were as well very good at music and possibly better on their instruments, maybe just liked the warm – fuzzies in their own act, for example, and pursued that to its end.  The recent “Stones” special in its tone reminds one of some of the older footage of Bob Dylan and his entourage, though where Dylan sang to his audiences, the “Stones” spoke and speak to them, and this perhaps as well has been what is so risky for them and their fans, and what has made the group, again, so entirely successful.  One might also remember the “Stones” were and are an outstanding live act.  With all this going for them, it is still quite difficult to define the band as either part of the entertainment establishment these days, as might have been their goal at one time, or as one group still on a tear for their fans in places.  All in all, seeing this footage about these boys from more years ago than many people would like to count back was a little strange in the presentation of images and recordings – the footage and related pieces played in their 1965 Ireland tour show again the mass upheaval in society and the turning of its elders toward young people who were in their own way still too young to shoulder the responsibilities and worries of the world, especially in Europe (first) and America (second) and the musical pieces in this feature bring that out completely.  It can be difficult to see a feature such as that on their 1965 Ireland tour, and listening to the music, without being really musical must be for some of their fans at least a little haunting and powerfully and humanly reaching to everyone at the same time.  Otherwise, one might mention the guys in this film just looked hazed at the time.  Many of their musical pieces are happy and uplifting, even jazzy nonetheless. 

In Newtown, Connecticut - Not Just Another Crime.

Media Photo

That the U.S. president has himself formally announced within the past few days a demand for the U.S. federal legislature to propose new guidelines for the control on the issue of firearms, specifically small arms and assault weapons, by the middle of January 2013 indicates that the executive branch at least has eyes and ears focused on tragedies such as that at Columbine High School, Virginia Tech, and now that of a few days ago at a Newtown, Connecticut elementary school.  The attitude (now that this business has to stop) of most federal officials to date about the banning or control of different types of firearms to date has seemed to be one of deferral of any definitive, collective (even familial among the bureaucrats we all know,) or more well – mediated and well – advised rules and guidelines around small arms and their sale and use, probably due to the clash of public influences over gun control dating back many years.  The issue against new and further controls, whatever their overall guidelines and / or provisions might be, must have to do with the ease with which gun rules overall anywhere are circumvented and violated; something that needs to be acknowledged and with the federal community identifying related systemic responsibilities, indeed an impossible task, for the overall lack of efficacy of present gun rules with respect to violent crime.  This is called for even though at this modern time in American history, violent crime is down and / or trending down in many places.    

 

Given the U.S. president’s insistence that gun control laws be revised given this latest violent tragedy, a further difficulty in passing and implementing, even enlisting help in the writing of such laws and their various regulations and guidelines in view of current resolutions are the right of adults in America to bear arms and related freedoms that are among the fundamental principles of our republic, and in the view of many, among the documented principles that have made America a great country.  Certain types of firearms that are sold person – to – person, either across a gun counter or at shows or other markets, and of which there are an overwhelming number of different types, do indeed need to be better controlled as these arms are made for sporting uses, pretty much only, but have proliferated greatly, and are in fact intentionally used in armed and violent crimes.  Examining this in any new set of rules should probably be chapter one in any application of the federal legislature in a law sent for passage and executive approval.  With this in mind, one would do well to contact local Congressional representatives in any area of the country with opinions, stories, missive and the like, as apparently everyone in the federal legislature, Congressmen and Senators alike, will be voting on the new gun control rules after rules are drafted for approval by same.  With well – reasoned legislation in view of the more modern societal imperatives that call for such reform, gruesome, violent, and uncontrolled, horrendous tragedies such as those in Newtown recently will be further avoided, especially considering any provisions in the new law(s) calling for certification of the owners of firearms outside those in public safety, the militia, and other law enforcement and military, that have their own approval methods for those actually physically handling firearms of different kinds. 

 

The victims of violent tragedies, such as those at Sandy Hook elementary school a few days ago, no longer have a voice to express outrage over what happened to them, much less can they pronounce the primal scream that such violence and outrage against them invites while touching upon the horror of the mortal offenses committed on them.  There are many details to continue to examine, including issues like the mental condition and character of the single perpetrator of the school shooting, what drugs he was taking and their related effects and side effects, and the slippery slope that led to his explosively violent and definitive and extremely malevolent act on innocents who were blind to his own, possibly self - loathing and uncontrollably ill – willed actions in their midst.  Any rules that arise as the result of this and similar previous tragedies, and there have been too many, should address not just simply a principled “assault weapons ban,” but proceed further into the culture of the offensive use of firearms, of whatever type, versus those used by responsible adults as a deterrent or for sporting purposes, especially considering the topic of small arms.  Counter to this, again, is the background of sporting and other types of gun enthusiasts who are responsible gun owners and users, and who would possibly be severely impacted by additional controls on their hobbies and pursuits that would technically place them in the same arena legally as those uncontrollably violent, sometimes traumatized, or psychotic or psychopathic perpetrators who have grossly abused their rights to use a firearm, and through wrongful and lethal use of a gun, deliberately (and the language is non – technical here) destroyed the rights and lives of others in the process.  Any future gun rules given the tragedies of which we are now anew and well aware need to reach down to the individual user, any culture or sub – culture in the world of firearms, and to American society as a whole as far as the systemic legal awareness of this issue and any relatted public awareness is concerned. 

 

For excellent commentary / editorial, see also:  CNN “Situation Room” – December 22, 2012; Wolf Blitzer’s Blog.

 

 

December 7.

Media Photo

Presently, Any Way They Can.

Media Photo

Effects of Extreme Right in Germany.

The recent story of Beate Zschäpe that has been brought to light in Germany highlights the additional modern problems and difficulties affecting ordinary and everyday citizens there. There is a an attitude pervasive among extreme right - wing activists and their associates in FRG at this point that calls for anti - foreign politics and administration and a message of preserving what the rightists there see as the national heritage or national trust. Much has been made of this in the national political debate there and media discussions as well, enough to invite the ban of the major extreme right - wing party, the NPD.
The origin of the case of Ms. Zschäpe and her cohorts has been traced to a part of the country with a particularly dark past given what happened there during WWII against the Allies. Anti - foreign and other extreme - right feelings are still harboured in places in Germany, but this is even more true in larger areas in the former East Germany. This presents a problem of public safety and other difficulties for authorities to deal with serious and capital crimes as discussed in this current case, and in some cases as here, the perpetrators did not appear to have sympathies among the police, though the police were at a loss to deal with the actual criminal elements they found and then therefore to try constructively to investigate and then to make arrests.

The reasons for the neo - nazi surge and resurgence in places like the former East Germany has to do with the legacy of the past, probably going back a hundred years, where the promise of a 'radiant future' enticed the populace of the area first into the political persuasions of one group, then another, then with the oppression of the former soviet regime followed by the economic depression there associated with the collapse of the soviets and the arrival of free - enterprise and more permissions and freedoms concerning political ideas. In many cases, the German authorities during the 1980's forward had methods to deal with the threat of the extreme right and its violent and criminal elements, and only occasionally at the time did anyone outside isolated observances of instances of neo - nazi events or crimes know there was cause for concern about such matters. The issue of the doings of Ms. Zschäpe and her associates has called for a re - evaluation of the local authorities there and their effectiveness in dealing with the conspiratorial and collusive, and violent crimes of such persons. See below for German press coverage links.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/german-chief-prosecutors-talks-to-spiegel-about-impending-nsu-trial-a-868133.html


http://www.zeit.de/politik/deutschland/2012-04/nsu-zschaepe


http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005199


http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005224

Someone might mention ... gambling (taking chances) in the public sector?

Media Photo

It does seem with the latest news that while many taxpayers would like to "revolt" against the current U.S. tax regime, and that current public finances can not keep up with spending, that no one will in all probability lose an eye or a tooth over the current debate about the 'fiscal cliff' that could bring our administration to a screeching halt.  People with ordinary sense do know that stopping a federal government anywhere is a dangerous thing for its populace, but due to the current jostling and elbowing in Washington, D.C., and the coming recess for the holidays, the cries of various legislators and officials, and of the journalists who follow them, might become even more shrill after returning from the break if legislators can not come up with a bill in the meantime.  Remember the House and Senate have seemingly had a hard time even agreeing to present conditions for the 2012 Farm Bill, actually quite an important bill, but one that has many accomodations and provisions to promote modern and efficient agriculture in America at this point. 

The issue with the 'fiscal cliff' is there are apparently many wise people who believe such a difficulty should be solved with an official 'tax reform' bill that would re - work some provisions of current law and while editing that, add some new ones.  This is a recipe for more gridlock and the wrong approach as the current tax laws do not allow for either the executive or legislative, the two parties concerned here with the 'fiscal cliff,' to do proper arithmetic about what efforts will be employed to manipulate federal expenditures, revenue collection, and so forth; so it is palatable for a restless taxpaying populace who want to see a resolution to the problem, but who apparently do not see as well the kind of radical change that is needed, not just in spending cuts or revenue collection, but perhaps even in the way the federal government in our country administers the tax system. 

The main theme proposed by the President does appear to be revenue collection and reducing deductions, and this is an important and appropriate approach given the level of current federal outlays that finance federal programs, the wars, trade and commerce and so on.  Revenue collection with a ten thousand page (or more) set of tax laws in the entirety is not easy, especially insofar as loopholes open and close in this text, and because the current text allows fewer and fewer such loopholes for the taxpayer, yes, but for the federal government as well given the principle of revenue neutrality, progressive character in view of deductions, and other things like taxpayer advocacy, credits, arithmetic limitations and so on.  So how does the President allow for a new and innovative plan that closes the trillions of dollars in deficit spending that arise in the current administration?  The answer used to be that we could allow for greater scope in Treasury and Federal Reserve operations with respect to the national debt, but this seems not to be feasible any longer as to pursue such an avenue right now would adversely affect U.S. Treasury debt ratings.  Funds to the states could also be cut off, but no one really knows anyone in favour of that at this point.  What would you do?

In viewing the problem, one might just mention that the U.S. is going or recently has traversed a time of very serious and hellish wars, more serious for the federal government than the wars between Athens and Sparta, or the wars against the Persians in antiquity were for their overseers.  With this as background for any sort of fiscal reform, and the effects and fiscal and economic baggage of the Great Recession, what is the sense in even attempting to resolve the fiscal crisis?  Note in any event that something has to be done to reform the federal tax structure (revenue collection) and outlays (federal spending,) and no one has had any ideas on this for many years that are new, primarily because officials in our nation's capital have clung to a model of public finance that is kind of moderate and that fails with respect to, i.e., the expenditures of a ten - year (or more) war, the gray - market economy in which there are no taxes, nor sales nor income taxes for example; and that the value added, income and gains, etc., to the wealth in our economy right now is a catastrophe with respect to the recent recession.  The reasons for this are palpable in any federal revenue collection illustration, many of which were quite rosy and optimistic looking forward, up until the recently recent past.  The fact is, personal income taxes will have to increase, and they might have to increase greatly before eventually being reduced again, and this is especially true as the business tax rates are high enough and the Treasury only derives so much revenue from business, usually relatively predictable based upon fiscal filings, and with little potential for an increase in revenue collection, even if the executive branch compels the House and Senate to "set and forget" with new, increased business tax rates - such a thing would be anti - growth and anti - enterprising, too. 

The increase in personal income taxes, people like me used to believe, should come from the elimination of certain deductions and what those should be has been a subject of debate for years.  Increasing the rates will not comprise the mysterious and magical alchemy that will relieve the system of its deficit burden and much less of its spending and other deficit tendencies.  Right now, it does seem that any legislation could increase progressive federal rates and would at least suspend certain deductions for a period of time.  The Great Recession as its circumstances have proven, proposes no windfall with respect to federal coffers and taxes, even with respect to a needed increase in rates.  Remember that the federal government has become much more expensive and has as well become more a partner in building people's lives.  While I know little about the country personally, a model like that of Sweden for an at least temporarialy reformed U.S. tax regime and additonal revenue collection might solve the problems of the revenue side of federal operations, and with the idea in mind that the wars and the recession have been expensive and while the federal government has thereby worked to muddle through with its social programs that have changed lives, even saved lives.  Now is the time to recognize such a thing and to allow the heartiest we have to address these individual issues. 

... upon a time, though more than once.

Follow this link:  Eastern Europe in The Twentieth Century - a perspective and record of today.

2



Media Image

What if we had a system that placed all winners and leaders as people who had mostly come in second place?  After all, there are very successful sports teams and players who are moneyed and who are known better for placing more than the occasional infrequent title won by others.  Politics in the U.S., however, only deals with money in part, and success in any administration here is not solely dependent upon wealth; probably a good thing as otherwise we'd have kings and queens instead of national elections.  Most people know that despite the consistency of some second place finishers, our nation, like many free nations in any election chooses its leaders based upon the plebiscite in which (barring the revolutionary ideas and rules controlling votes through the electoral college that occasionally have reversed popular votes in the past) the person receiving the most votes becomes chief of state.  In other words, no one really remembers who finished second in many U.S. national elections, despite the importance of this for the administrative process. 

 

The power of the presidential election as we know it is one candidate can win the office of chief of state without (1) having raised the most campaign money, and (2) appealing and pandering to special interests and power interests within our region.  It is true that the Republicans toward the end of the campaign this year had raised more money, and that Obama as victor of the presidential campaign contest in all appearances was re - elected without having become beholden to industrial interests, Hollywood, financial and commercial interests and the general business community that has sat the sidelines in the post election talks about what we have to expect going forward for the next four years.  The thing that clinched the election for the president was indeed his good showing in the second and third debates, and his campaign rhetoric in the last days before election day; and his being supported by the Clintons who still carry the mantle of an outstanding Democratic presidency during the 1990's from at least the standpoint of macroeconomic growth.  Even the Carter policies of the 1970's have found a home in the Obama presidency in the way of policies of 'priming the pump' to bring back jobs, the level of federal spending, foreign policy and other areas that matter to all of us.

 

Ohio, Michigan Wisconsin, and then Pennsylvania, …  Even Nevada mattered yesterday as I heard a local news show on the U.S. West Coast broadcast a piece on the importance of Nevada and its four cities (where most people in the state reside,) of which Reno and Las Vegas, and the broadcast was considerably and interestingly detailed.  The U.S. Democrats, apparently in this election contest, had their own super - statistician, maybe even a virtual one, parsing, slicing and dicing those numbers with respect to undecided, uncommitted, and other voters in select areas.  This undoubtedly contributed to their campaign efforts and paid electoral dividends in the end. 

 

Remember that Mr. Romney, though everyone might not remember him forever, waged a fierce campaign, and he was classically and characteristically Republican in his showing in all three debates and his approach to people in the campaign arena.  The Democratic party is the party of urbanity, sophistication, pro - choice, …, and people watching our country at this point have to come to terms with the issue about whether the Obama administration will become now more aggressive with respect to its public policy agenda in additionally affirming its identity and greater influence on the world stage.  People like me seriously doubt that the Obamas can now be accused of populism or using the office of the presidency for liberal  or more progressive social agendas as the talk in most areas analysing the current president's policies is quite moderate in nature, and the country's conservatives are more powerful now than they were in the 2008 presidential election, having made the national election a closer contest this year.  The chief executive now also has to answer apparently to a Republican - controlled Congress and to his conservative constituents as well if he is to chalk up additional political wins to his scorecard, and in his victory speeches he has pledged to reach out to everyone to make the political process work better  under his supervision. 

 

That Mr. Romney as a Republican candidate suffered for being identified as powered by moneyed interests who are out - of - touch was an old party line that has been around for at least a few elections and one that some conservative candidates have refuted on their way to national wins.  We as a country are apparently also benefiting from more liberal policies as the recent employment figures indicate and economic predictions for the immediate future are much better, issues around the "China Challenge" appear to be within the realm of being resolved some time soon, we have a vice - president who is influential and moderately conservative despite his party affiliation, and the high - profile government departments have also found reprise and renewal with the gifts that have been earned in the latest national election itself.  Despite that a good number of people do not necessarily like the classic political patterns characterised by the Democrats at this point, and indeed more voters this year expressed a desire for dealing directly with the twin deficits and the size of government, this president and his high officials do have a chance to reify certain opportunities including further resolving difficulties in the Middle East, petrol politics, financial and fiscal reform, further progress in addressing the chaos of foreign policy, defense preparedness, national security, immigration (as pledged), to name a few, and more.  The national papers in the next few days should examine all these and some others that were in the headlines during the campaign and that need to be summarized and talked about.  This president as re - elected has established his own identity and that of his liberal constituents upon the institution of the office of our American chief executive, and the tone of it is optimistic and hopeful to mention the least.  People like me wonder what Tony Blair would have to say about this. 

 

 

They Changed the World.

Media Photo

Maybe some time look up something about the people in the picture above, as for the most part in their political careers, they believed in the greater power of good for everyone in America, and worked to their last days for this purpose.  The ideas they had were just to make things better for Americans so we could get more done and have more productive, fulfilling lives.  Many political and other organisations today are founded on these values, and especially on the ones that America is a special place that should not be sullied by petty agendas and "liars, fornicators, and backstabbers."  These people saw the terrain of their own country, with criticisms against it as not having a greater moral fibre, nor a common nor well - founded culture, as content to concentrate on populism and the media; and as a place ruled only by the wealthy, as one with great potentialities for everyone and a political - ideological elegance surpassed by none.  Now that they are all gone, and anew, social commentary has turned to self - criticism and doubt again, soul searching, and to an extent with our place in the unipolar world as grasping at straws at what to do about everybody's problems where these three seemed to have the solutions all worked out before in life.  It was perhaps against these folk that Americans internationally had gotten the reputation for some time as just being simple people, even those from the city, who were just "experts" in one narrow thing or another and who could be used time and again to solve problems and difficulties.  Maybe the only strike against any of these people or their colleagues, and dear ones, was they sacrificed everything for the good of their national public, even for those who were their adversaries in the political debates of the day.  In this way, we hardly knew them, or if we knew them it was only through the papers and the television.  Sometimes the sacrifices and deeds with merit that people do are called into question, especially in retrospect and by those willing to find fault in those pursuing the greater good and other perfections.  That the lives talked about on this page are not more celebrated due to the kind of doubting the public engages in today in the name of modernism and skepticism should be examined as well...  Not that we need worship our public servants as idols in the Old Testament, but that their lives, and even their faith or faiths be given a more neutral hearing or judgment, and that the constructive and again purposeful and productive things they did be more in relief against foibles and missteps.  That this column is set down in this way does not call for permissively dismissing the wrongs and the elbowing and even the pranks known to them as public servants, though how they upheld the state needs more attention and the successes accrued to it as the result should be better illustrated as well. 

 

THS

October 1962 - October 2012: Anniversary of Us All on The Brink

Media Photo

It is difficult for anyone living at this time, probably apart from a minority of experts, to determine when the height of the Cold war was and how that can be represented by events.  Certainly a milestone in the overall outcome of that very long conflict for the Western powers was the resolution of the Cuban Missile Crisis begun publicly in October 1962 and resolved through the excellent administration of the Kennedy presidency less than two weeks later.  There are any number of books and articles available that have appeared and re - appear from time to time about what happened to successfully resolve that crisis, not only for the U.S. as strategic guarantor for the free world, but for everyone for whom this series of events, generally or in great detail, has any memory of those thirteen days.  An excellent recapitulation of the Cuban Missile Crises, again, can be seen through January 2013 at the National Archives.  See also the Press Releases for this event and the site for the O'Brien Gallery housing it.  Even the simplest viewer of these evidential documentaries as shown at the Archives will know, and this despite popular acclaim in some respects, the crisis in Cuba at the time was no game.  It is perhaps a tribute to the successes of the sea blockade and other presidential orders of that time, that one might have used gamesmanship as the soviets apparently did in attempts to put extreme political and other pressure on the U.S. president and to outmaneuver him; this only resulted in an increasingly dissatsifying outcome on their end as in a number of other forceful contests. 

 

New York Times article (related.)

 

... from the beyond (in 2012.)

The hand of Mao Zedong

Other links (sarcasm) to the same documentary:

http://depaulinternational.wordpress.com/2012/09/17/free-screening-of-documentary-film-the-revolutionary/

Vive la revolution (just forget the Shining Path for a moment.)

Media Photo

 

http://law.scu.edu/blog/hightech/archive.cfm

http://law.scu.edu/blog/hightech/archive.cfm

La guerre de 1812 à 200 ans.

Photo Média

Il est possible avec un regard dans le passé aux 200 ans à percevoir l'intention et le but du régime napoléonien terminé surtout dans les batailles après sa campagne en Russie de 1812.  Les lumières de l'époque de l'empire terminé en 1812 et encore en 1813 furent d'un type remarquable dont l'exportation de la France de sa religion catholique aux territoires à l'extérieur, le code napoléonien, dissémination de la culture et pensée françaises à l'étranger aux U.S.A. jusqu'en Asie, l'emphase napoléonien sur la voix du peuple en vue de l'empire et le pouvoir militaire à une base de l'armée et ceci en dépit des forces navales français presque aussi important que celles des Britanniques.  Les méthodes utilisées par Napoléon à faire réaliser ses efforts militaires furent beaucoup plus humaines que les autres d'antan.  Les fautes de sa culture militaire qui surgissaient à la fin ont inclus l'assaut à feu sur les champs des batailles où les grandes carrés de personnel affrontent directement les batteries de l'ennemi en la cassure soudaine et définitive de la ligne ou des fronts de beaucoup des opposants, et même la présence de Napoléon sur le champ de bataille fût en même temps presque toujours le sceau de la victoire pour la France.  Ses ennemis à Waterloo l'ont trompé en l'invitant à l'assaut devant les artilleurs anglais suivi par la cavalerie qui ont coupé la voie français à dérouter les anglais pendant le jour, et parallèlement à confondre les troupes français suivant une piste des renforts et l'encerclement éventuel des Britanniques.  Une critique sur Napoléon qui voit le jour même au présent était qu'il toujours cherchait à résoudre les conflits par la bataille et encourageait le pouvoir militaire de l'armée, non à l'ignorance de la mer mais étant donné la terre avait beaucoup plus de richesses à offrir à part des conflits de mer.  Le stratège français de cette période, en partie discuté par Talleyrand probablement, comprit la conquête des territoires européens autant que possible, même ceux de l'Europe de l'Est, avant de tourner les obus vers les opposants sur la mer dont les anglais se présentâssent les plus forts. 

 

A cet égard, Trafalgar eut probablement eu lieu trop tôt pour le gout des gérants français; et ceci en 1805 était une clef à la défaite des français en Russie et à Waterloo en 1812.  Presqu'au point de Trafalgar, les français ont eu plus des grands navires de guerre avec plus de canons que ceux des Britanniques - et selon leur façon a répondre à ce difficulté les anglais on pris des navires de guerre français et leur ont détourné sur la amirauté qui les ont bâtis.  Dès la perte de beaucoup de ces navires, et la concentration sur la conquête armée, les méthodes des français et leurs intentions dans la marine furent révélées, et leur forces navales ne sauraient jamais rétablis.  Le rôle de l'armée de l'Italie, l'Espagne, et les forces expéditionnaires ont renforcé les édits de la Confédération du Rhin établi par le Premier Consul et ses compatriotes du mois de Brumaire.  La relation administration - militaire de l'empire fût soulignée par le pouvoir et la politique complexes et super - rationnels que comprenait la réalisation des plans gérant l'empire à la fois. 

 

La victoire des Britanniques sur la marine français en 1805, et plus tard à Waterloo sous les alliés en 1812 scellait le rôle de l'ascendance du contrôle de la mer des Britanniques pour autant d'années désormais la chute de l'empire français.  En tout aussi, des tas de principes sur l'artillerie de guerre, les rôles dépassés de certains types de personnel militaire à commencer avec la cavalerie ont été formulé au cours des guerres 1799 - 1814 présumées provoquées par Napoléon, mais ayant pris place dans un monde où le corps militaire choisit être attaqué d'un côté ou à rallier à l'offensif au premier de l'autre. 

In Memoriam (again) - Anna Politkovskaya 2006

Media Photo

Also:  http://rferl.org


Russia and the W.T.O., etc. ...

On Popular Criticism of Russia And The Russians

Wednesday, September 19, 2012

 

 

Media Photo

With the expulsion of Mr. Gennady Gudkov from the Russian legislature, indicating a new repression in Russia against dissent, among other things, including the call for a removal of a policy of linkage (by the U.S. government) with things like trade, emigration and human rights, the accession of Russia to new economic and political heights, including the status of Russia in the W.T.O. at this time begs the question about the acceptance of economies into that organisation actually based upon their commitment to free trade or indeed some acceptable hybrid thereof.  That the Russian administration could slap U.S. businesses due to the provisions of the Jackson - Vanik amendment of 1974 and its current applications does scare people interested in issues like human rights, adherence to a western democratic rule of law, civic rights, anti - terrorism, and better terms of trade between countries like the U.S. and Russia, and for reasons that interest the business people in both territories.    Accession to the W.T.O. has called for Russia to emphasize its finances and potential to carry more weight in the world of free trade, strictly and specifically a utilitarian economics approach, and this while Jackson - Vanik is an administrative bill that is used to mirror international Russian policies and the human side of international business with Eastern Europe.  This makes for very little convergence of strict ideas in the meeting of business people and economists who would like to see it kicked out of the way, and humanists who see the value of protecting human and civil rights and practices as primary to a healthy society and healthy business and commerce. 

 

That the current Russian administration might just be  seen abroad, at least among many in the West, as one of provincial officialdom that little understands the importance of the more refined ideas around human rights and domestic dissent and their related effects upon commerce and world opinion, does not disparage the current Russian regime from asserting itself into various associations given its self - interested qualities and new - found economic weight in the world.  Part of this positioning apparently has been to diffuse the stark memories everyone has of communism and its effect on the country and the consciousness of the people today that remains mostly centrist and one as well that leaves the debate about administration and economies, public and foreign relations, to the elites, much as during Tsarist and later soviet times.  The current Russian leadership as obscure in its origins does call for intriguing and introspective interpretations as to the motives of the government there in promoting such people, especially with respect to the current president who apparently really started in the old K.G.B. in East Germany during a time in which many believed, and not just inside Russia itself, that the U.S.S.R. could win the Cold War - and thus the many communist sympathisers of the day and not just in Eastern Europe.  One should note people have popped up in places everywhere who have owned property in Russia for many years, and who knew and know the Putins and Medvedevs, again starting from the old days.  One liberal rationale from utilitarians everywhere is East Germany and Poland, at the time of Mr. Putin's work there, probably could have used help from anyone, though many do believe despite this that communism was no help in any way whatsoever with its promise to organise and move society forward, even from the beginning.  Mr. Putin appears to represent the crowd as inspired by soviet times who voluntarily ran places like DRG and Poland, North Korea, and even Cambodia and Viet Nam, in an oppressive and strict fashion to reinforce the doctrines of communism against the free world.  The legacy of this, given the junking of communism and its apparatus, has been for silent machinations with respect to free trade (cf. conduct of Warsaw Treaty countries and their overall influences and world connections,) and demands upon the international community for legitimacy along official lines.  This is the international house the Russian leaders are building at this point, while using their connections and political weight among non - aligned nations and NGO's that emphasise and promote issues at this time more or less as they always have done, under the indirect sponsorship of Eastern European regimes, and with socialistic / communistic tendencies. 

 

On one level of analysis, it is not difficult to see how and why the Russian administration is throwing its weight around on the international stage lately with respect to trade and other issues, including repression and human rights:  The country, no longer communist, has always had a strong central government as located in Saint - Petersburg and then Moscow, and again, society as greatly influenced by the church has allowed the political elites to rule.  This makes for a different kind of management of social and political, business and legal issues, etc., and as such the byzantine heritage encompassed in Moscow is easily and evidently upheld.  This should be looked into by more journalists and interested parties who are curious themselves enough to try to determine the continued role of the emphasis of Moscow in the identity of Russia, versus the major cities and areas of the provinces where vestiges of the old regime apparently remain, and as well where the church is more powerful.  The current Russian regime has made attempts, despite slapping people on issues, in its image in some respects to detract from the authoritarianism of the communist regime as centered in Moscow.  This is no reason to be persuaded the polity in Russia should be authenticated more in the West, especially due to continued abuses, though it does appear Russia's leadership is taking its own, practical approach to additionally modernising and bringing up the country from within and creating better ties with the outside.  It will be curious to see if this can continue without additional power - shuffling and grabbing there that is age - old and that could more sully the impressions people have in learning about it from the exterior, or visiting there at this time. 

 

… more.

 

Review - New Book by Bruce Bartlett - "The Benfit And The Burden."

Review - New Book by Bruce Bartlett

Friday, September 07, 2012

Media Photo

This austere book is one that I would like to have published about tax reform myself apart from the Hall / Rabushka literature on the flat tax that has appeared every so often. The book begins with a brief illustration of what federal and state taxes are about in the U.S., and the tradition of taxes in this country as started in the old world, what progressive taxes are and how citizens are taxed in other countries in comparison to ours. The tables throughout the text are extremely helpful in understanding the journalistic illustrations in this book that can be quite involved and detailed, even burdensome without the tables.



Most of the book itself is a primer on how to analyze tax policy, be it
within the U.S. or Europe or other countries with different systems of
taxation. Even the character of income issue in our own tax code, an issue
of some sophistication and ongoing debate, is illustrated for the reader.
This text, primarily written for the concerned citizen who believes not only
in federal spending reforms, but in reforms in the system of federal revenue
collection, provides a slate of the different aspects of tax reform, both
historied and recent, and the different types of taxes our leaders have
considered over time with the idea of reforming the U.S. tax collection
system. Content runs the gamut from court cases and "what is income," to
systemic / historical changes, to the various radical reform proposals that
have been publicly and privately presented by politicians over time. The
appendices are worth reading through as well, and the overriding purpose of
the book to make our tax system and the prospect of tax reform more
understandable and transparent to the ordinary taxpayer (in view of
editorials, opinions, legislation, court cases and the like) is accomplished
while delivering content as well for those technically educated about taxes,
related policies, government resource allocation, the decision - making
process in the capitol and so on. Everyone interested in social reform, the
social sciences, law and regulation, decision - making and the polity should
read this book. In short, a great text if you file a tax return and are
interested in modernizing the collections process through the U.S. Treasury
and your state treasury.



The book in part seems to have been inspired, as shown in chapter 5 and
chapter 9, among others, by the impact of the Bush era tax cuts and cites
Bush officials on the effect of the cuts that in their identities have to do
with the current twin deficits and their magnitude and impact upon current
and future revenue collection / tax policies. While the Bush administration
encouraged policies to increase home - ownership and investment gains, and
these goals were substantively and wholly accomplished to the extent
possible, and with the help of tax relief and tax reform, the current polity
complains these were too expensive for anyone's taste and have weakened
government finances for the time being. When one examines the scope and
purpose of the Bush tax cuts and reforms, it is important to note that
during those years choices were given to people about what to do with their
capital and wages, and given the human condition some, in fact a good part

of the gains people experienced in property and other assets in addition to their increased wages, options and pension and other plans, were the result of a good amount individual speculation and utilitarian waste, even to the extent of investors and homeowners cutting and running when asset prices dipped in the late 2000's. This in all evidence was a choice of many asset - holders who were making leaps and bounds financially, at least at first, but who took risks and denigrated particular types of assets and / or the taxes on their gains when they were not as expected individually. This is an implication in this text of the new search for tax reform and other, popular trends that commentators and voters, citizens and wage - earners alike are talking about. Thus, the publication of such a provocative text in an election year will enhance the overall reform discussion should any candidate read it and choose to speak about his related views. Since the funding of federal programs like MediCare and Social Security now depend to a great extent on future improvements to the tax system and the time is again now for the parties to play their hands on the subject, such literature is propitious and timely, and deserves at least leadership among academics and federal officials in this discussion.

 

With the Obama Speech - 6 September 2012

 The 2012 Political Contest -- Opinion.

 

It is perhaps entirely true the speakers from the U.S.'s major liberal party have a smoother and more easy going style in their public appearances and talks, save for one or two extremely strident leftists who appeared at the Democratic party convention podium within the last few days.  The U.S. Democratic party at this point, as many liberal parties do, has portrayed itself as the pragmatic and businesslike political voice at this point.  This is no different from the message as given by any liberal party in any fair election in the free world; there's nothing wrong with it, it's just the same old line, I might respectfully propose here, that liberal parties in the Western world have been talking since time immemorial.  With respect to this, and with respect to the current economic / commercial / business climate in the U.S. and its international position with respect to same, there are many within our shores who do believe the federal government should remain as it stands, with its current role in many of the lives of the U.S. populace as guide and guarantor.  There is nothing wrong with this thinking, especially given the overflow of issues the Democrats are covering in this election - maybe to guide the voting attitude and attention of the populace, but more probably just to promote the agenda of their party that makes the federal administration in many cases everyone's biggest customer - from taxes, to services, and even to the goods we buy at the local store or online.  There is an argument somewhere in the literature that if your populace is bored and apathetic, and if there are seemingly unbearable social and other problems afoot, that liberal governments are indeed a way of muddling through these issues.  In other words, if you are battered and have little faith in yourself as an American at this point, and you are relinquishing your strengths for the most part to make a life for yourself and your family, sometimes in some countries right now an evident and obvious political trend, then vote Democratic in the November general election. 

 

There is a contrarian and again, controversial attitude for the voter as presented in a challenging way by the Republicans at this point, and this has to do with an overall avoidance involved with the paternalism (in fact, very tightly knit and even abusive paternalism on the part of a federal or even state administration) as briefly illustrated in the preceding paragraph:  The major campaign difference at this point depends upon the Republican contrasting the Democrats as those soliciting the business of big government, with more revenues to the public sector through taxes and debt proceeds, primarily; to the basic Republican ideas of getting going on solving the problems of the day through debate and consensus, and without the totem of public enterprise that is worshipped by many liberals.  The conservative party in America does as an entirety probably believe such attribution to the federal administration, that of social and societal benefits and guarantees in increasingly risky public finance schemes (as things have to be paid for,) is unnecessary insofar as private and regional interests can more narrowly define and solve the issues and problems of the day instead of the kind of centrist fortification the Democrats believe in themselves.  The speakers of the day at the latest party convention in North Carolina extoll the virtues of big government and encourage everyone listening and watching to value big government projects and financing, and why not?

 

The fact remains that history is full of examples in which funding for public projects was made by nation states and their process of approval through bicameral legislature and checks and balances, and this even though the projects were extremely costly and later bankrupted the governments completely.  The 'pragmatic' liberals at this point in America might nod to themselves that we are already in an unrecoverable situation with respect to finances and compare and contrast other regions, for example, that are supposed to be worse, and that their "liberal" governments have seen them through.  This is really untrue, as America still has a very high standard of living far above most of its international neighbors, and for the time being, and the U.S. can withstand currently its big government expenses:  Right now, but maybe not much longer given the somewhat gloomy international recipe many economies have going forward into the future at this point.  Even the greatly dependable economic producers of late, China and the 'Four Tigers' (Japan, South Korea, Singapore, Taiwan, …) and many other world regional economies predictably face the doldrums in the new media and other current business and commercial forecasts.  This might in part be due to internal uncertainties in different regions, uncertainties about state and regional leadership and the like, but it has put a damper on the U.S. future in its role as international economic / political, etc., leader and powerhouse.  This limitation is worrisome and especially given the tone of the speakers at the Democratic convention, promises an eventual selling of the proverbial seed corn that has our federal government watching over us and providing a safety net and other offices for people to turn to. 

 

Even for the most dour and pessimistic of voters, probably among whom I do count myself, who will cast their votes in November, it becomes clear after a quick study of the promises made within the last few days, that our federal administration can only do so much to guarantee the quality of our lives, and this no matter how many tax and other dollars are spent on the subject.  This is an ordinary case of diminishing returns to the kind of federal policies we have had in the last few years or so, not including the wars, and while only the general election will prove whether or not people need it stopped, the treatment of the federal and state treasuries as a policy in the collection and expenditures process in which they have been treated of late is extremely dangerous to the political process in the capitol, and even more dangerous in the burdens it presents to the ordinary U.S. citizen, no matter the imputed or promised benefits.  The great idealist and thinker Max Weber, in his writings, did cite a principle in which political representatives and administrators, especially the leading ones, had a main obligation to digest and solve issues and problems in ways understandable to the common people and the voting public.  This is perhaps one of the strong points of our democracy as our leadership, with its checks and balances, has almost always obliged itself to do.  The way public finances have been ignored by the current administration and its related policies in its doings have never been altogether clear and in this way present a prospective danger to the relationship between the voter / taxpayer and the federal administration in the U.S.  No one seems to have pointed this glaring issue in and of itself to the public and this is because the identities of the problem are everyone's purview. 

 

The tree of public finances appears to have been shaken too much at this point by the current leadership and this has proven dangerous - a.  To the young and able people in this country who want to pursue high - quality education; b.  The ability of wage earners to provide for their families financially, primarily due to federal tax and other burdens; c.  The lack of perceived benefits in pursuing administrative careers does alienate and turn away capable people; d.  At a time of heavy spending among what appear to be cliquish and closely - knit federal departments and programs, the voter / citizen / wage earner is being asked and compelled to sacrifice things financially and even morally at the hands of people who are feeble as administrators, who have their pet projects, and who solely engage in self - interested rhetoric; the list goes on.  In some ways, the social commentators and thinkers of long ago, and the modern economists with their various models that are admired alike, in their various analyses and conclusions about our status as a nation in choosing a new leader, albeit still formidable and influential in the world overall, would propose serious remedial and needed renewed and fresh efforts to approach the loose ends created by rhetoric and profuse and what some term irresponsible federal spending and its pauperizing effects.  We can continue the current policies of revenue collection and allocated program spending as they are apparent to most voters, and foreseeably face the economics and political situation of governments like Spain or Georgia, for example.  Thus, the call for change and the like among Republican and Democratic candidates is highly appropriate right now:  There will be much thoughtful and rhetorical currency spent on this and related issues as well during the debates and even after election day as these same, basic issues carry much hidden weight and are gravely in need of attention, and have been so since some time in the past. 

 

 

 

Created with Microsoft OneNote 2010
One place for all your notes and information

Democracy and the "rule of law."

While it is indeed possible that the state - building as the U.S. has been doing in various parts of the world to date is based on democracy and the rule of law, it might be reasonable to mention at this point the "rule of law" language could be overdone just a bit by policy makers.  Here's why:  In the utilitarian world, that is, the world espoused with utopian goals along the lines of what we know essentially to be modern or neo - liberalism even along hegelian lines, the rule of law is reduced to and atomized into the norms we all learn as individuals in school and in our experience in society on the one hand.  On the other hand, the rule of law as a principle that is elevated to overriding deity status for those who believe there is the law and only the law as enforcing the edicts of the international state and its rules and norms as pushed out to media, other states and their statesmen, and other, interested parties.  This again, is a strictly liberal view and one of systemic totemism, and the author here contrasts the global utilitarianism behind this principle with the overall conservative belief in the functions of the state in our own village as rule - maker and rule - enforcer among other things - bicameral legislature, a judiciary based upon principles such as the Bill of Rights and human rights, and a chief executive that is elected (for starters.)

 

I might be citing some high - school history book without really knowing it here, but the normativeness and the relativeness that are sometimes bred into the state as adopting above all the principle of the rule of law do engender meta - juridical functions in society and in the state in which judicial officials can abuse the overall legal considerations - those of business, culture, the arts, economics and finance, science and so on, even sports and entertainment - between society and the state as built - up that discourage proper legal procedure and action in what we see as appropriate within our scope of people living in a free society.  The unbounded legalism of the former soviet union is one such example of improper administration as brought about by the institution of utilitarian socialist superstructures, especially the judicial.  There are other, less obvious examples and though the principle of upholding the morals and norms of society has great merit, the concentration of any state administration on legal(istic) principles and practices throws it out of balance; sort of like when Beria was at the head of the party in one way or another in soviet times. 

 

Many of the difficulties in the open conflict in Afghanistan at this time call for diffusing the apparent and glaring administrative / political issues that prevent the government there from gaining more legitimacy among its people.  There are issues as well like making sure the police are properly trained to handle terrorist situations, and diffusing again the influence of the Taliban in many places.  There is also the international relationship with Pakistan and Afghanistan that has U.S. politicians worried about the stability of both countries.  Efforts so far have been to try to win hearts and minds with U.S. personnel taking the lead, though terrorism continues to be a fearful danger to everyone there and in neighboring states right now.  The Taliban as well continues to engage in violence while summarily avoiding truces and alliances with the Afghani government or provincial governments under Kabul, much less do the Taliban take part in peaceful fine - tuning as it should be at this point.  All of this might be avoided in some way or another through the recognition of some traits in Afghan society by its leaders and some cession on the topic of territoriality and provincial groups (not the Taliban here) to Kabul might be in order. 

 

The nightly news features Western - style photo opportunities for Afghani leaders, something that might be irksome to their sometimes ultra - liberal citizenry in some places, and the influences of the Western powers in the present administration there are palpable and might be annoying as popularized as well - this attempt to bring some decent organisation to the chaos in the country that has reigned for so long, even from before the soviet invasion in the 1970's, is highly commendable, though to some Afghanis the values and culture(s) of the country's society might obviously conflict with the type of legalism introduced into their system by the presumably foreign allies under our latest polity.  Another difficulty is the U.S. policy - makers up to this point have only too well understood the issues of the Middle East and Central Asia as they have been there for a long time, and through the lens of the policy - making of our own governments, the Afghanis are only too quick to point out the fissures and faults.  This has resulted apparently in an over - reliance on security forces and legal proceedings that are not equipped nor prepared on a domestic front to support the level of criminal activities that take place there, including the terrorism.  Another sub - plot in the story of the "Frog and the Scorpion," and / or the social and societal pains of state - building in foreign places where some of the citizens might not actually be interested in the "Federalist Papers" or Western norms and rules, and not out of simple ethno - centrism or cultural refutation.  

In Silent Memoriam.

Media Photo

Good English.

Media Photo

Christopher Patten's Talk about ...  (Guardian, U.K., 2004)

Brief Bio - Patten

Read His Book (2012)

... another command performance (trumpeter and story teller as well.)

Media Photo

Lincoln Center Jazz.

'Objectivism' and the Republicans.

Media Photo

One would do well during this election not to try to figure out 'Objectivism,' but to read an essay or two on it before casting one's vote in Novemeber (election day is less than 90 days away, mind you.)  That supporters have more or less characterised Mr. Ryan, the Republican Party candidate for American vice - president, as a kind of objectivist, and the Democrats might in turn portray him as insincere, even a clown, will make for a good race indeed.

While I have never really read about objectivism, nor anything dogmatic on the subject, it does appear the Republican approach has some appeal before the Democratic Party's approach of providing wishful comments about the international business climate, the polity and gridlock in Washington, D.C. due to overall budget and other glaring problems and issues, even pep - talking voters over the commmercial airwaves while mentioning "built to last," and other such fanciful characterisations, it does seem that despite a deficit in the polls, the Republicans might give the liberal American party (Democrats) a run for their moneys and maybe for other things by election day.  Any disparity from the sameness of the candidates and their persuasiveness to many people based upon likes and dislikes, even personal, non - political ones, will have to do with the politics of "life as a process" as emphasised by Democrats here that have us missing the boat and a dollar short in many cases right now, and the "let's get off our duffs" ideas of the Republicans.



Media Photo

Whereas the Democrats, through the Obama / Biden ticket have a kind of will - to - power that is palpable in their silky, urbane public language, the Republicans are rolling up their sleeves in places like Wisconsin and Virginia.  People do know the Democrats are the party that relies on Huxley - type ideas, including that of appealing to town and even town outside U.S. borders in all its, again urbane citizenry, bustling populace and grit that is so appealing through the commercial media.  The Republicans right now appear to be relying less on the cultural and financial heat of the megalopolis and instead, while not abandoning urbanity for the sake of the provinces, appeal to Americans who want to get things done on their way to restoring their fortunes, maybe quietly at the exclusion of the kind of bombast that is featured in political discussion of late to draw attention to meeting even very small political and administrative / economic goals.

That Mitt Romney has enlisted the efforts of Paul Ryan from Wisconsin on his hopeful electoral journey and given at this time the attitude of the Republicans in acknowledging deficitary, defense, trade, currency valuation, and other political / economic issues including just abortion and taxes, and other public policy difficulties subject to the American agenda, and the response by the media and the public so far does show America needs a chief executive who might just speak in a more grounded way about issues and his own political agenda than in the compliments, platitudes and blandishments that have characterised the present administration.  

"The United States and China" at the Olympics.

Media Photo

There are many additional facets to look at in the U.S. / P.R.C. political relationship at this point and this calls for a possible re - examination of the stereotypical Olympic athlete, in all evidence talented but clueless, who might test his / her physical and mental toughness at places like Long Beach, CA, before reporting for international competition every four years.  The thing that is odd is this duel will continue in another two years, primarily as a pre - cursor to the next Olympics events, at the World Championships wherever they will be held - competitivity and bragging rights again about things like sports medicine, training methods, practice techniques and the like. 

Media Photo

That the P.R.C. has overridingly made the choice to emphasize anew itself in the international political arena via the Olympic medal vanguard is odd and embarrassing for a nation - state that can not tie its shoelaces with simple things like an actual and real social safety net, human rights, nepotism, and other obvious defects including the single - party political system it operates under that stems from a severe reaction to the aloofness and carelessness of royal and imperial rule that came to an end in the early 20th century.  The current Chinese regime ends up looking politically more like that imperial regime of old in the way it establishes society's priorities, structures its accession and polity in the areas of administration and governance in the overall and again, overrriding will to power that any sociologist or anthropologist will caution against in its many forms as established and institutionalized by the CPC through its by - line of "spirit, land, energy."  The happenstance of the stilted and conjured, and otherwise celebrated, Olympic achievements and accolades, and this without examining every statistic, of the P.R.C. at this point capture a place in history certainly, though the importance of this is to make one wary of the application of the ways one makes championship athletics happen:  The implications of the showing of Olympic commercial spots on NBC at these 2012 events as featuring a past soviet - bloc gymnast, and the actual story of Ms. Nadia Comenici are compelling and an object lesson in what can drive national policy on the subject of athletics and international achievements and awards to the extent they are completely devalued by the constant banging away at young people about how there is a requirement to have medal status or other high international recognition.  Such a politicization of athletic achievement detracts from the simple and non - professional, and honestly - competition - driven status in international athletic venues at this point.

When we were kids, and as we read the local newspaper and talked with our buddies about what goes on in Russia, and what went on in places like East Germany, Romania, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, and so on, and even given the paucity of the news about the soviet bloc at the time, young people in the States knew how the ambitions of the communists and non - aligned countries had politicized much of the international scale and scope we learned about without respect to occasional, actual news that came through about it.  The realized vaulting ambitions of the P.R.C. policy - makers about their place in international athletics is a softer version, and therefore more palatable for some right now, of the social engineering of the soviets that has gone to the dust bin.  It is incredulous how this is allowed to supplant the honest efforts of athletes in other countries such as U.K., Germany, England, France, and even the Russian Federation right now, and the assertions of P.R.C. on the athletic stage in many ways at this point are dependent upon un - civil ideas and practices that are undue and inappropriate given the peaceful, forthright and unified attitude of many of the athletic teams at the 2012 games this year.  Media images.  Please pardon typographical errors here. 

THS

What for and in what way (could you have done this)!?

Media image

That the recent movie theater assassinations in Aurora, Colorado, have captured most of the attention of people who watch television and read the news, maybe even more than news of the Afghanistan war, does indicate that the media is still highly influential in bringing stories to the attention of the greater public, those of importance and moral consequences, and even those that are not.  It is not necessarily important that the Aurora gun – rampage suspect, a well – educated restaurant worker who had been seeing a psychiatrist, angrily exploded as some people have been known to do in focused yet uncontrollable fashion - not necessarily important outside of this behaviour reflecting individual and even collective psychoses, even violent culpability in the kind of over - reasoning that is apparently in the suspect's manifesto that seems indifferent to man's fate.  It is, however, of great or greater concern as to the way in which this person took out his apparent and in all evidence, violently motivated anger in a plot against people whom he might have momentarily disliked, but who were however complete and innocent strangers to him.  The way in which his dwelling was booby – trapped in complex fashion also indicates a very sophisticated cornering of investigators and other authorities into taking precautions about his person and related behavior that are troublesome and disconcerting, and shocking to the degree these devices were intended to harm anyone unaware.  People like me (and me) are not experts in how the mind works; far from it.  Though it is important to determine for oneself, the reader(s) of this writing, if any, some view on why a person who by indication, and by his own manifesto, including the body armor, intended to assassinate when he did.

The issue of gun violence in the Aurora theater events is similar to the recent assassinations of over sixty people (children, mostly) in Norway in a similarly shocking rampage.  Most people like me are at a loss and would be unscrupulous to venture a guess even as to simple motivations in such things, though with some of the evidence as seen on programs by television viewers it does appear again the assassin was reacting to something that made him angry against people, even angry against himself.  Some in the popular press and public have ventured to guess that the U.S. now needs more gun laws, and quite to the contrary, there are probably a good number of gun laws, federal and state, and we do not really need more.  I have never been to a gun show, though I have looked at a sport – shooting range and have looked at firearms for sale in sporting goods stores (from as far away as possible and without real interest,) and know this is probably not characterized by any affinity, or repressed need for guns.  I just do not like them, and like most such people it is extremely difficult to understand gun violence and related confrontations other than as a kind of hell.  It is probably true that once automatic and other weapons such as those used in the Aurora and Oslo incidents are banned, if indeed a law is passed to ban such arms and effectively enforced including by obedient gun owners, said arms will then continue to be easily available, despite all illegality, through the gray and black markets for weapons; and the authorities will be at a loss to control the use of such weapons through counteractive firepower for another set of constitutional reasons.  What, one must ask, is a decent solution to this dilemma? 

Many such events such as those around gun violence we hear about every day are random events and are intentionally perpetrated by people in contravention of the rights of others, who are willing to use force to prove their point, especially those who have used small arms in the commission of crime.  The police are good students in the detection and prevention, and deterrence of such crimes as they are planned or as they are about to occur, many times with the help of the citizenry.  About this, there is not a doubt, and it is less doubtful the crimes such as the recent Colorado theater shootings and the Oslo shootings are extraordinary in their plotting and execution, and as well reasons why the perpetrators deserve an examination as to their faculties, then possibly a reasonable trial within the rights of defendants, and a determination of a fair decision or decisions by the courts related to their alleged crimes.  Some times gun and other violence is impossible to stop, and this is what is so powerful and anarchic about some constitutional rights in our country in the event the rights are blatantly and obtusely, and violently abused.  More gun laws and stricter ones possibly and probably would only confuse the issue of the inappropriate and illegal use of amendment rights and would only serve (as in a kind of “bad apple” policy) to greatly restrict and curtail the liberties of many for the sake of a sole intent of preventing the deranged attacks and violence of a very few people.  In fact, violence of the kind on touchy ground such as the right to bear arms openly obscures the guns rights issue and serves the policies of anarchists and phalangists and other political ideologues to use the systemic remedies built into our polity to more or less legally twist itself into a pretzel.  This is obviously not the goal of gun control, and there needs be restrictions of an additional kind on violent perpetrators; but it’s catching them before they act using the system of crime detection that apparently failed here, and even more that the Colorado suspect succeeded in his diabolical plan while using methods and tools that were again, flagrantly against immutable laws, and those of human society; even those of nature.

For an excellent related discussion on gun control, see some of today's and especially the July 20th edition of Inside Washington.

praesto et persto (revision here.)