Month: September 2009

A reader writes:

I disagree with both Noah Millman and Fouad Ajami. We did

not go into Iraq after 9/11 because we had to make a huge military demonstration somewhere, no matter how implausible the aims (Millman); nor did we want to teach "the Arabs" a lesson (Ajami). Cheney, Bush and company had long had Baghdad in their gunsights — 9/11 was merely an opportunity, just as WMD was merely a cover. And as far as a general antipathy towards "the Arabs", I never saw that in the Cheney/Bush policies, and I certainly never saw that in Bush personally — in fact he seemed rather close to the Saudi royals.   
 

No, we went into Iraq to fulfill a longer range strategic vision: Surround Iran. Defend Israel. Secure the oil.

That's what empires do: Surround their enemies. Defend their Holy Land. Secure their vital resources. Hardly surprising that the American Empire would do any different. 

What is surprising is the sheer incompetence with which it was done. But then, that's the hallmark of the Bush years, isn't it? And the hallmark of an empire on it's way to trouble: an utter incompetence based on the inability to read the real situation. Ideology over reality. Utopian fever dreams over cold conservative wakefulness. 

Of course, as a modern PC liberal, I deplore empire. But as a student of biology, I recognize it's universality. So the question, to me, is not whether we will or will not be an empire, but whether we will or will not be a competent one — a competent, progressive, humane, enlightened empire, or an incompetent, regressive, inhumane, unenlightened one. Which immortal rep did Cheney, Bush, Rumsfeld and company earn for themselves — and for us? But then, means really are ends. 

Which is what continues to give me hope as I watch Obama.

Jonah Lehrer continues a discussion he began at the Dish:

I thought this brand new paper on stress and the cannabinoid receptor was extremely interesting. The Israeli scientists demonstrated that microinjecting an agonist of the CB1 receptor (a primary binding site of THC, the active ingredient in pot) significantly reduced the elevation of stress hormones in response to scary stressors. They researchers argue that their evidence "supports a wide therapeutic application for cannabinoids in the treatment of conditions associated with the inappropriate retention of aversive memories and stress-related disorders." Like I said before, pot just might be the next Prozac. Are you listening Eli Lilly?

(Image from the LA Times shows medical marijuana dispensaries in Los Angeles; Hat tip: Reason)

Jack Shepherd says, "It's like watching a classical music Guitar Hero."

Ryan Sager parses a study on the impact of downturns on individuals:

[T]he effects here aren’t solely on stock-market participation. Another study (abstract / PDF) looks at how recessions affect our beliefs about the world, using data from the General Social Survey from 1972 to 2006. Using time and regional variations in macroeconomic conditions to identify the effect of recessions on beliefs, the study finds that:

[I]ndividuals growing up during recessions tend to believe that success in life depends more on luck than on effort, support more government redistribution, but are less confident in public institutions.

What’s more, it finds that these effects, like the stock-market effects, are long-lasting.

No Impact Man made a movie:

Dana Stevens reviews it:

Unlike Morgan Spurlock's similarly themed Supersize Me, No Impact Man never fully embraces the gimmickiness of its own conceit; neither the filmmakers nor their subjects completely convince us that what the Times called "The Year Without Toilet Paper" was worth it. That ambivalence makes this film less punchy and entertaining than Spurlock's, but also more complex. If Michelle and Colin are bourgeois fucks, yet we still somehow admire their tenacity, what does that make us?

Several years ago, Nina Siegal read through Publisher's Weekly bestseller list from 1900:

The bestseller in fiction took a precipitous turn in the 1980s towards what might be termed the “throwaway read,” a novel with a shelf life of yogurt. Interestingly, that doesn’t seem to be quite as true with nonfiction bestsellers. America’s nonfiction bestseller lists still have some pretty hefty titles.

Scott Esposito adds his two cents.

A researcher finds universal concerns, not culture, shape morals:

“It’s remarkable how little cultural variation we have found in developmental patterns of moral reasoning,” says Helwig, who presented his results in Park City, Utah, at the recent annual meeting of the Jean Piaget Society. Helwig and like-minded researchers don’t assume that kids’ universal responses spring from a biologically innate moral-reasoning capacity. Instead, they say, children gradually devise ways of evaluating core family relationships in different situations. Kids judge the fairness and effectiveness of their parents’ approaches to punishing misbehavior, for example. These kinds of relationship issues are much the same across all cultures, from Helwig’s perspective.

Honley, England, 2.54 pm. (Yes, that's a cricket match in the distance. Ah, England.)

Tsutomu Yamaguchi was either the luckiest or unluckiest guy ever.