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.)

Larry King NOW

Media Photo

During the early 1990's, a good friend of mine at the time suggested I listen locally to a national radio station at the six o'clock hour (commute time) - the "Larry King Live" radio show as it was apparently known then.  I was in school and subscribed to a local paper for news and knew of the show, but never really became a fan until Mr. King's show rose in the television rankings.  At the time I was introduced to the radio broadcast, the show was actually on televison twice at night, but I did not have cable and was watching a Los Angeles network television talk show at the time as sponsored by Paramount (at the time excellent programming as well.)  People like me know everybody has watched and talked about "Larry King Live" over the years and the guy has millions of fans:  So why not an internet television show at this point for the biggest cable talk show personality at this point (and possibly the biggest talk show personality ever, even as compared to network talk show personalities past and present.)  See Larry King's internet talk show, "Larry King Now" on Ora.tv, another innovation from the genius, or at least the legend of radio / television talk.  It does appear you need to have the bandwidth to watch the show - and have a high - speed connection if you plan to take in this program.

Also, see HULU and Jimmy Kimmel with Larry King.

... from an Ohio newspaper (Canton.)

Commemorating 1987 for some.

Linked to Jackson - Vanik ...

...  another trade bill (read on) with ...

In This Interconnected World (belated book review.)

Media Photo

The Geopolitics of Emotion, (Dominique Moïsi, 2008, Doubleday.)

In this long essay that ends with a chapter on futurology, the author makes an attempt to replace the old paradigm of simple political nationalism with one that is psychologically – based upon political confidence, identity and emotions (primarily fear, hope and humiliation among those.)  In this increasingly interconnected world, the three emotions providing a sketch of the collective conscious and unconscious outside the ordinary mapping of economic and other resources.  This level of analysis of current events and trends in its subjective orientation might help the reader to recognize different patterns of change in the world outside the everyday models we all read, watch and hear about.  The primary examination in the text is that of the weight of Occidental Europe and American on other states, primarily in the areas of politics, economics, administration and business; and the concerns of other states over other places including Latin America, Russia, Turkey and Ukraine.  This theme of overall anxiety about what is going to happen with these territories and others in view of a rise in political and economic power on the Asian continent, of which principally Singapore the P.R.C., and the antithetical political / economic climate in the Southern Hemisphere now mostly in abject poverty, comprise a good part of the author’s writing that makes up the book.  Some discussion is made of Germany and its new role in world affairs after reunification, though the author pays more than lip service to Central Europe that has become again a territory with an increasing global stature, and with the agreement of many nations.  That the author is a child of a Holocaust survivor and devotes some attention to this and similar happenings is a talking point as well.  These overall themes are cause for political discussion everywhere and they set up the rest of the issues examined in the book around a background of international concern and anxiety over what are now some apparently average – educated, yet growing and more and more influential ideological radicals.  

The book faithfully describes the great improvements and increasing might and hopeful circumstances of Asian countries after a long reorganization and many fits and starts:  There are apparently several commercial centers on the Asian continent outside Shang hai, that are comprised of, again, Singapore, Mumbai, Dubai, and others.  The realization of their fortunes in the kind of real estate projects in these places give hope to those in poverty in these places that are similarly and unfortunately also targets for terrorism.  All this development, even in Japan where the country itself is quite Europeanized (though at this point ‘downhearted,’) has resulted in less antagonism toward Europe and America; and as a result of all this and despite world terrorist groups, the world is a less dangerous place in many respects at present.  China and India, as a consequence of their reorganization and modernization policies have many demographic issues and difficulties to deal with now and into the future. 

There are observably within the authors’ scope in this text conditions for despair in places like Arabia and Africa where terrorism, cited often as Al Q’aeda terrorism, attempts to deal with ideological conflicts with the European continent and America, and threats of a decline of Islam and Arabic influences everywhere.  Quite observable again in this mesh of issues is that of Israel, as from fitful to increasingly vulnerable in view of increasing frustrations in the Arab world about the existence and continuance of that country despite the promises of its neighbors.  Additional frustration and anger over Israel is caused among the Arabic people on the subject of the long – past fate of the Ottomans, and even the toppling of Mossadegh (1953) in Iran that provoke even more detailed discussion and contention, that are relied upon and that might at this time be better relegated to various histories and chronicles.  It is clear to some the Islamists in Arabia would prefer an Islamic and not a Christianized Europe (cited here is “Globalized Islam,” a recent report by Olivier Roy.)  This is frightening to some given for instance the Muslim attitude towards women and women’s rights and autonomy.  The dogma of Islamist terrorism as espoused by Al Q’aeda, despite its proponents being so well – educated and as appealing to the intelligentsia in many places, finds a home more likely with the extremely poor and dispossessed in places who are searching for ways to humiliate the West and its countrymen.  The links between terrorism and Islam, violence and Al Q’aeda, must be separated from each other at the source and in the eyes of the public in order to do away with the Arab emotions that aid and abet terrorism, notably the anger, fear, boredom, apathy, depression and aggression that pervade Islam.  Breaking this / these link(s) would provide a way to change the “Arab – Islamic culture of humiliation,” as the author says, away from the dogmatic and rhetorical diatribes against Occidental interests and their people, and against the kind of volitional and gratuitous violence in the news everyday as originating in Arab capitols.  Again, the book ends with an essay about the future and geopolitics that is as well worth reading as the rest of the text.  

2012 Movies - Oliver Stone And Tax Policy (... and maybe even the oil business.)

Media Photo

That I know people like me have never really seen an Oliver Stone movie in the right light (if we have seen one,) mostly because we were too young to comprehend the kind of metaphysics and mysticism that goes into even the most mundane of Stone’s ideas as realized through film, but why make another film about characters as influenced by the counterculture with again a message about right – wing conspiracies, the government, the university system, pot and relationships, the black market for drugs, all of which are ideas used by Mr. Stone to stir our attention to his cosmopolite and quite detailed and complicated view of things?  Mr. Stone, and to his credit, was born into a background in which he resisted the temptations of the vices and other wrongs he illustrates in his productions, even the moral and other character defects of the related roles in the scripts he imbeds on film – you do need to be a “clean” person these days to succeed in the entertainment or media industries.  As well that Mr. Stone fought in a bitter military conflict, and probably blindly as many men did at the time, that was at least in part dedicated to eradicate the illegal streets drugs market as we knew it during the 1960’s and thereafter; a conflict the U.S. officially abandoned, also adds to his illustration of the colorful and sordid as an authority on these who maintains in fact a critical and necessary distance from societal problems and vulnerabilities, and as such one might observe a contrasting reality between the character of an artist and the media he produces.  This trait or set of traits might also be entirely necessary in the oversimplified yet Hegelian world in which he finds himself, and similarly that of his characters, bright and educated and at the same time illicit as many of them are:  But why make a film about pot?

To know the answer to this question for Mr. Stone, as probably no one does, has to do again with the iconic mysticism of many of his productions and the very salient and high – profile themes he decides to address in his movies and interviews, etc., probably even in his relationships with his acting and other film crews.  To illustrate this, try to picture Mr. Stone as a director of a “Barney The Purple Dinosaur” media production, or a “Clifford” the dog feature.  This is impossible and improbable and might even be the subject of humor at his table when he and his major motion picture people talk about it.  The themes he examines, even in the sort of action / drama / mystery films he directs, are even more glaring than the stifling red lights at busy traffic stops during the height of rush hour, or even more attention – getting than having someone shouting in one’s ear(s.)  The issues of Mr. Stone’s productions are also problematical and propose in many instances an incomplete story to his viewers; all of this done with a goal of stirring the moviegoers’ minds out of any torpor or boredom (doldrums) that adds up to modern malaise.  The scope of many of his themes is so important with respect to American society and its issues at this point that one can hardly overlook the object lessons and teaching element in his films, at least insofar as how the movies are viewed today.  It is also something to be wary of and for example to look at a second time in the director’s overall efforts at political and cultural persuasion and in the high impact of much of what he presents that trumps even existential themes themselves sometimes.  That he has chosen to examine dramatically the culture of a simple street drug, as pervasive and insidious as it is, mirrors probably much again the ethical and practical morality he learned as a young person, at Eastern colleges, in national service and then in film school.  His relationship to the work of his mentor, Martin Scorsese, with respect to his continued filmography does indeed show a mirroring of attitudinal, moral, intellectual and other influences upon the man that contrast with who he actually is in his films.  This might be why he has succeeded for so many years in Hollywood as a town full of pitfalls, and as a place probably worse than any capitol as far as “sink or swim” is concerned. 

It does not really matter in and of itself that Mr. Stone has made a movie again about educated people who out of Adlerian and other difficulties do odd things, even blatantly illegal things.  His films going back some ways are probably full of such characters and their illustrated roles.  What does matter is the overall weight of Mr. Stone’s ideas that call for an examination of conscience through his telling of stories in film.  Though I have never really seen his work, maybe only part of one of his war movies, the overall questions provoked by his work and the inclusiveness with which he creates his things for people to experience are remarkably noteworthy.  Maybe all young people need to see at least part of this new movie, “Savages” (book by Don Winslow,) as directed by Mr. Stone, that apparently examines the “party” atmosphere of pot, not from a cult point of view but from its utilitarian and economic consequences; and this might change a popular attitude (or two) about it.  This writing is neither a movie review as admittedly I have not seen “Savages,” and nor is it a review of Mr. Stone’s directing abilities or acumen for better or otherwise.  These few paragraphs do however propose the meritorious courage of a Hollywood person examining social and societal forces that are age – old.  Remember finally that the streets drugs trade is a trade interdicted by state authorities (on every level,) and as the subject of this film should also be looked at in terms of its message and the government expenditures (funded by taxes) in eradicating pot and its related markets.  Mr. Stone might have a phrase or two in his film production here referring to this without allusion for one to the idea that the state has an attitude itself of persecution with respect to streets drugs and their markets.