Year: 2013

During the Iranian uprising of 2009, the Dish continuously clashed with Flynt and Hillary Mann Leverett, the most well-known skeptics of the Green Movement. The husband and wife team continue to blog at The Race for Iran, in addition to Flynt’s role as Penn State Professor of International Affairs and Hillary’s as Professorial Lecturer at American University and CEO of the political risk consultancy, Stratega. In a post last year on why the contested 2009 election still matters, they argued that “if anyone was out to steal the election, it was Mousavi, not Ahmadinejad”:

That is why Mousavi started alleging fraud even before the polls opened.  And, contrary to Dubai 0249, it was Mousavi, not Ahmadinejad, who first declared victory on election day, while polls were still open, Iranians were still voting, and not a single ballot had actually been counted.  If anyone was out to steal the election, it was Mousavi, not Ahmadinejad.    

Mousavi failed in this enterprise.  But he seems to have made a lasting impression on the thinking of those Westerners who are perpetually on the look-out for a Yeltsin-like figure who will catalyze the Islamic Republic’s transformation into a pro-Western, Israel-friendly secular democracy.  Continued attachment to the myth of the stolen 2009 election matters, because it continues to keep the United States from coming to terms with the Islamic Republic as it is, not as so many Westerners fantasize it might be.

In another post, the Leveretts explore Ahmadinejad’s legacy on economic reform. Read more in their new book, Going to Tehran: Why the United States Must Come to Terms with the Islamic Republic of Iran, which comes out tomorrow.  

I was a little stunned to find myself defending it after one viewing. I was all ready to start a picket line. But the most pointed and polemical defense of the movie I have yet read is here. It’s from film critic Glenn Kenny. It’s somewhat aggressive to Glenn Greenwald – but Glenn’s a big boy. Read the whole thing, but I like the Ramones analogy:

In 1976 Robert Christgau wrote this about the first Ramones record: “I love this record–love it–even though I know these boys flirt with images of brutality (Nazi especially) in much the same way ‘Midnight Rambler’ flirts with rape. You couldn’t say they condone any nasties, natch–they merely suggest that the power of their music has some fairly ominous sources and tap those sources even as they offer the suggestion. This makes me uneasy. But my theory has always been that good rock and roll should damn well make you uneasy.” I agree with Bob in all these particulars, and even more so if you substitute  “good art” for “good rock and roll.” Zero Dark Thirty made me uneasy.

Greenwald’s evocations of amorality are not entirely inapt. There’s a sense in which the film at least skirts outright amorality by refusing to assign any definite values to the various Xes and Ys in the equation that makes up its narrative. Its perspective, from where I sit, is sometimes flat to the point of affectlessness. There is an almost cynical mordancy in its depiction of events, and this to me is entirely clear from the film’s visual grammar … But Greenwald sees none of this, and insists: “There is zero doubt, as so many reviewers have said, that the standard viewer will get the message loud and clear: that we found and killed bin Laden because we tortured The Terrorists.”

I guess I have more faith in the “standard viewer”. Kenny has a useful bunch of links, expanding on critical defense of the film. If you’re interested, many of them are very much worth exploring:

My review for MSN Movies, which I filed before even Frank Bruni’s column appeared, is now up. I stand by it. Manohla Dargis makes some salient points beautifully, as she always does, in her NYT review. The great Larry Gross has some provocative perceptions at Film Comment’s site. And Devin Faraci shows me more grace and kindness than I’ve ever shown him in commending my work in a piece about the film for Badass Digest, and I am grateful for his giving me a necessary lesson in humility, but more important, I think his perceptions on the film and his detailed descriptions combine for a wholly admirable piece of criticism. I thank him.  Scott Tobias’ AV Club review is valuable. Also, I am reminded that David Poland, commendably, got the ball rolling from our end with this piece. 

UPDATE 2: Ignatiy Vishnevetsky’s piece at MUBI’s Notebook is remarkable.

You can read through all our coverage of the debate over Zero Dark Thirty here.

Neil Shea examines a hurdle in US efforts to leave Afghanistan – reconfiguring the locals' mindset:

The elders have stopped talking. They listen to a soldier explain to them for the third or fourth time how the new system is supposed to work. "You can’t come ask us to build you a madrassa or a clinic or a well anymore," the soldier says. "You have to go to your own government."

It is the language of leaving, of withdrawal. But it doesn’t work. No matter how many times the soldier says it, the elders pause and then repeat a list of things they want. A madrassa, a clinic, a well. The soldiers can do nothing; the message does not sink in. They say it again anyway, because that’s what they must do. No, you can’t come to us … and the cycle is old and new, beginning and ending.

Recent Dish on Neil's previous post in the series, on the mutts of war, here and here.

(Photo: An Afghanistan National Police official is directed by an Afghan police officer during a training exercise at a police academy outside Herat on December 25, 2012. The cadets have to complete an eight-week course before graduating. Until now the training has been done by Afghan and forces from NATO's ISAF coalition but now it is run by Afghan personnel alone. By Aref Karimi/AFP/Getty Images)

Evan Soltas suggests increasing the Earned Income Tax Credit:

Liberal arguments for increasing the minimum wage have a fundamental flaw: They restrict the set of policy choices to either a minimum wage increase or doing nothing. That means they overlook the single most important federal policy for the poor: the Earned Income Tax Credit.

The EITC is a measure in the federal tax code to support the living standards of the poor without creating a “welfare trap” by diminishing the incentive to work. Economists widely consider the credit a success for reducing poverty while increasing employment. Created in 1975, the credit has been successively expanded in five times since. It is now the nation’s largest anti-poverty transfer program.

Bill Bishop, who provides the above map, compares county-level voting from 2008 to 2012 and finds that "[o]nly 208 counties changed allegiance in 2012 out of more than 3,100 counties that cast votes." He provides some perspective:

Statistician Robert Cushing checked all the presidential elections in the last 100 years and found that, on average, 24 percent of all counties switch parties from one election to the next. The 208 counties that changed from 2008 to 2012 amounted to less than seven percent of all counties. That is the fewest flippers of any election in the last century.

Jason Miklian spotlights the Indian city of Surat, a way station for most of the world's diamonds – both legal and otherwise:

Here in Surat, dirt-cheap wages and loose regulations have created a dream environment for the global diamond industry. It has turned a sleepy provincial town into a new megacity within a single generation, a business center where more than 90 percent of the world's unpolished diamonds are now processed and polished. Individual stones can change hands up to a dozen times over a matter of weeks in polishing houses that grab from piles of legal and illegal stones like mix-'n'-match candy bins. Deciphering clean from dirty becomes nearly impossible. Once the Gujarat Mail [train] reaches the end of the line in Mumbai, the stones have had their damning histories washed away, and buyers ship more than $40 billion of certified merchandise annually out of a country that international authorities say is clean. But if you own a diamond bought in the 21st century, odds are it took an overnight journey on the Mail. Odds are too, you'll have no idea where it really came from.

This weekend on the Dish, we provided an array of religious, books, and cultural coverage. In matters of faith, doubt, and philosophy, David Attenborough recalled his vision of nature without man, T. M. Luhrmann emphasized the spiritual dimension of drug-induced altered states, Victoria Beale lambasted recent books from Alain de Botton's "School of Life" imprint, and readers responded to Maurice Sendak's moving thoughts on death. Walter Russell Mead reflected on the entrepreneurial spirit of American religion, Jay Michaelson critiqued the new film adaptation of Jack Kerouac's On the Road, and Christian Wiman explored the language of faith. Beth Haile dissected the moral theology of Les Mis, Katy Waldman hailed Milton's Paradise Lost as a progenitor of science fiction, and David Bentley Hart contemplated the religious contours of modernity.

In literary and arts coverage, Jacob Leland mused on the meaning of gluttony in famous books from the early 20th century, Hannah Rosefield deconstructed the role of obesity in literature, and Edith Zimmerman argued there's no such thing as good advice. Amy Whitaker stalked Harper Lee, Zadie Smith offered insight into how books impact the way we view ourselves, Hamilton Nolan ripped into the narcissism of young writers, Ed Park located the source of the P.G. Wodehouse's enduring popularity, and John Banville ruminated on Rainer Maria Rilke's Letters to a Young Poet. Carolyn Abbate explained how opera has evolved, Laurie Fendrich appreciated the rogue art critic Dave Hickey, and Norman Lebrecht eviscerated the Mozart industry. Read Saturday's poem here and Sunday's here.

In assorted news and views, William Pesek assessed the evolving political crisis sparked by the gang-rape and death of a 23-year-old woman in India, Amanda Marcotte pondered the implications of Internet vigilantism, James Panero put the digital age in the context of other information revolutions, Jesse McDougall explicated the science of time and space, and NASA considered lassoing an asteroid to bring it into the moon's orbit. Ben Robinson revealed the secrets to success on The Price is Right, Justin Amirkhani went behind the scenes at Medieval Times, Christian DeBenedetti tracked the rise of a black market for craft beer, Megan Garber remembered the Swedish physician who invented the exercise machine, and new research supported the case for nature's cognitive benefits. FOTD here, MHBs here and here, VFYWs here and here, and the latest window contest here.

In case you missed it, read Andrew's declaration of Dish independence and all other coverage and explanation of the decision here. Find out about our core strength – amazing readers – here. And please consider becoming a member here.

– M.S.

(Photo by Flickr user Randy OHC)

Silicon valley startups, such as ZestFinance, founded by the former chief information officer at Google, Douglas Merrill, are starting to tackle the challenge of "subprime" borrowers. Marcus Wohlsen explains how finely tuned algorithms could be key to lowering the high rates often charged to them:

In theory, the high cost of a traditional payday loan stems from the greater risk a lender takes advancing cash to someone who can’t qualify for other forms of credit. Some critics contend payday lenders charge usurious rates to trap borrowers in a cycle of debt they can’t escape. But even lenders acting in good faith can’t offer the low rates made possible by ZestFinance’s algorithms, Merrill says.

Using data-crunching skills polished at Google, Merrill says ZestFinance analyzes 70,000 variables to create a finely tuned risk profile of every borrower that goes far beyond the bounds of traditional credit scoring. The more accurately a lender can assess a borrower’s risk of default, the more accurately a lender can price a loan. Just going by a person’s income minus expenses, the calculus most often used to determine credit-worthiness, is hardly enough to predict whether a person will pay back a loan, he says.

"Our finding, much like in Google search quality, is that there’s actually hundreds of small signals, if you know where to find them," Merrill says. For instance, he says, many subprime borrowers also use prepaid cellphones. If they let the account lapse, they lose their phone number. Would-be borrowers who don’t make keeping a consistent phone number a priority send a “huge negative signal.” It’s not about ability to pay, he says. It’s about willingness to pay.