Catching Up

A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
-- Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching

It's been a while since I made an entry. All the focus is on the primaries, and I'd like to move ahead to the general election and take on the Republicans. It looks like my candidate Obama is in a strong position, so much of the recent happenings seem like noise that must be endured, lots of sound and fury signifying nothing. We'll know more after Tuesday.

I'm thinking about how to take on the arguments of McCain. My own stance is probably more pointedly opposite him than even Obama's arguments may be when this debate starts heating up. I'm happy that with Obama as the candidate, there's much less chance for the Iraq discussion to deteriorate into how the "war" was simply mismanaged. Senator Obama will forcefully argue that there should never have been a war in the first place. There are a great many reasons why we shouldn't have gone into Iraq, and Obama correctly stated many of those back in 2002. Beyond the obvious misdirection of the battle against Al Qaeda to a country that had no role in 9/11, Obama knew that such a war would further damage relations, both within and outside the Muslim world, that it would require occupation resources and heavy cost, and that such endeavors are really doomed from the start. Obama's judgment on this issue is so inarguably correct, or at least it should be by now, that it's just a question of whether Americans are really ready to hear it.

Throughout history, occupying forces have never been able to fully conquer any nation. The pitiful excuse for a government now in Baghdad will never be truly accepted by the Iraqis. Democracy probably has a lot less chance of taking root in Iraq than it would have if we hadn't been meddling in that country since the 1950's, but until we get out of there, it has no chance at all. Will Obama talk much about the truth of why we're there? Will he discuss the heavy pressure being brought to bear by multinational energy firms such as ExxonMobil for control of Iraq's oil wealth under the guise of Iraq's oil "revenue sharing" plans? Will he mention the international leverage we want to possess by having our hands on the spigot of such an important resource right in the middle of the world's biggest region for it? There are many reasons why he might not. The forces that want to exercise that sort of control in the region will still be around after the election, and they'll continue to make an impact on how we behave. It's going to be up to us to make sure the whole argument gets laid out, because I don't think any President is going to be able to stand up to all this alone. It's still going to be up to us to drive the argument forward, and force America to face the truth about its own imperialistic pursuits. These problems extend beyond whatever administration is in power, and they don't go away simply by electing a relatively progressive Democrat. It's not that simple, folks. We have work to do.

If we simply accept that the world is a nasty place, and we have to be nasty if we want to be a part of it, I think we're failing to examine that position in sufficient depth. For myself, I can't lay claim to being an international expert, but I've known and worked with people from an enormous range of countries, and I think I've developed a pretty good sense of people overall. There are certainly some very violent pockets in the world, and there are some attitudes in the world that defy belief. Even in some countries we think of as being developed, there are nakedly racist attitudes toward other peoples that are beyond shocking to our American sensibilities. I wouldn't try to tell you for a moment that there isn't a whole lot to worry about with respect to our security. A lot of this planet is just plain crazy, make no mistake. Still, so much of the worst part of the craziness stems from patterns we can follow by studying history and related areas. When you look at what's happened, and after the shock has worn off a little, there's nothing very surprising that we haven't known all along about human nature. We know that too much power corrupts, that greed is too prevalent, and that we've become sort of a power-hungry, greedy nation. So what did you expect? I expect that we can improve things, perhaps beyond anything we could currently imagine, if we stay involved enough to examine the motives for our actions, and actually exercise the best judgment instead of opting for the most material gain. There's a lot we wouldn't solve by such a change, but we might start cutting some of our problems down to size.

Noam Chomsky resurfaced to give a talk about Iraq in Massachusetts the other day, and an article for The Nation called The Most-Wanted List that examines the terror of recently assassinated Hezbollah commander Imad Moughniyeh in the light of other violent activities in that part of the world. These are invaluable perspectives if we really want to understand the events of today's world as a caring human being, and not as an ideologue or unquestioning supporter of U.S. administration policies. I need to remind you now that I'm looking at all this in somewhat of an attitude of retrospective, as someone who's grown older and is no longer in the prime of health. I need you to understand how clearly the things that really matter stand out within that context, and the clarity doesn't represent a shift, such that some things should have mattered before, but other things matter now; what's clear is that these are always the things that really mattered, the things that provide a broad and deep sense of meaning and value throughout all phases of our lives without regard to age or life situation.

If you've read some of these entries, you know I've been studying the world situation very closely, and I've seen that our policies have done at least as much harm as good, and that's putting it mildly. I know that many of you just haven't had the time to pull back the curtain and see the sham for what it is, and I feel that many of you would be prepared to take very strong action if you really knew the truth. There are still too many, though, who would still try to ignore what's going on, who would hope that someone else could fix things, or afraid to try to fix things for fear of upsetting the status quo. What I have to tell you is that you absolutely must stop these things from happening because we're at multiple tipping points, for democracy, the climate, and the world. As long as we let George do it, he or Cheney most certainly will, and the world will suffer.

I've never said this won't be a long struggle. We can't just elect a progressive candidate and take a snooze. We not only have to wake up, we're going to have some long nights ahead, and we're going to have to upset some applecarts along the way. I'm the last person that will ever advocate any sort of violence. Don't look for that sort of thing here, because any attempt to solve problems with violence immediately destroys the solutions. What we do have to be is strong, and steadfast, and confident that we'll know what has to be done when the time comes as long as we listen equally to our heart and our head when we're asked to decide.

An election is a good time to shake things up, but we need to shake things up every day from now on. I don't want anarchy. I don't want everyone to give away all their belongings and renounce materialism. I don't want to open the door for every crazy who shows up. I just want you to start making your decisions with a thought to the things that are really important. I want you to imagine how you'll feel about things when it's nearly over, and how you'll feel then about some of the choices you made. Will you rationalize about that compromise that helped to exploit a few hundred workers in some obscure part of the world, or will you look for some way to ask for some kind of forgiveness for having come up short when you didn't really need to? I don't think we always need to think in big, revolutionary terms, even to achieve something big and revolutionary. Sometimes we just need to start taking care of the little things, and the big things will start to fall into place.

The Stakes

There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and ITT and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, Union Carbide, and Exxon. Those are the nations of the world today.

-- Arthur Jensen explaining the world to Howard Beale, from the film Network (1976)

For a little while, many of you are turning briefly from your everyday concerns, and thinking about some of the things I've been thinking about. You can see that things have turned sour in many respects -- Americans are losing their jobs and homes, the economy is in freefall, Iraq is still an atrocity, global warming is heating up, and nuclear nations are imploding and headed for crisis. The promises of the politicians were just so much hot air, as usual, and now, for your quatrennial moment of participation in this process that determines so much of your lives, you're going to begin choosing between the remaining list of candidates, and cast your vote on the direction you want this nation and the world to go.

If you've not been paying much attention, I can't blame you. For years, I was only able to glance from the corner of my eye as I worked 80-100 hours a week on various projects, the last my five-year contribution to Windows Vista. For nearly a year now, I've stepped back from all that, and really have paid attention to things, and have been sobered by how actually reliable my instincts have been, and yet how dulled they were by the distractions of everyday living. I need to make a choice as well, not on "Super Tuesday", but in the caucuses that will take place in the state of Washington on the 19th. I'm fortunate, I suppose, that the candidate I've been supporting is still in the mix, as I've been a Barack Obama supporter all along. Obviously, I will be supporting Obama in the caucus, unless something changes dramatically.

There were other candidates, like Dennis Kucinich, who really stated the problems more plainly, but I've been around for a while, and I know when some things just aren't going to happen. It's sort of amazing that I would assess, correctly, that the candidacy of a fellow white male from my home state of Ohio would be less viable than that of a black man born of a Kenyan father, but this is a pretty amazing time. Now it's time I tried to state some of the problems plainly, since my candidate still has to play the game and garner votes.

There are real issues at stake. This election won't necessarily be the defining moment that marks the turning point for America and the world, but then again, it might be. At the very least, it will make a critical statement about how we perceive ourselves and our current dilemma, and whether the odds for the future will have improved, or sunk to new lows. We're going to be voting for individuals, Republicans and Democrats, and you've heard a lot about the various candidates. I don't feel like speaking in specific terms today. I feel like making some generalities, working out of that instinct that has been validated and sensitized by my year of examining our current milieu.

I've mentioned elsewhere, though I don't think I've mentioned it yet in this blog, having watched a re-broadcast of a talk given by the Dalai Lama on the fifth anniversary of 9/11. I don't recall now where the talk was given, although it was out of doors, sometimes in the rain, with the Dalai Lama holding an umbrella over his head while he spoke. He talked a little about violence and discord, and he spoke about anger, even admitting that he himself gets angry sometimes. Then he made an assertion that stuck with me, claiming that when you're angry, 90% of what you feel is exaggeration. I don't know about the percentage, but I know there's more than a grain of truth in that. That's part of why I want to continue today's post more in generalities than specifically directed toward individuals, because people are more complex in many ways than even some of the most complex forces at work in our society, and people's motives on an individual basis are rarely entirely good or bad. It's probably a little more accurate to point to a direction and call it pernicious than to point to a person and do the same. I'll leave you to extrapolate conclusions on your own.

There are things going on now that reveal the most cancerous, destructive, tormented aspects of human nature imaginable. There are people who, for whatever reasons, are sowing seeds of misery throughout the world to such an extent that it beggars imagination. The word Evil is such a loaded and absolute term, but I don't think it can be avoided here. If we try to view the world as a struggle between good and evil, we become lazy, and quickly oversimplify everything in black and white. It's hard not to characterize individual actions as Evil, like the bombings in Baghdad this week, and as such, it's hard not to characterize the active promotion of conditions that engender such actions as embodying that same Evil, in all respects.

There is a possibility that you could make a choice soon to support someone who really doesn't care about you at all. Not the least little bit. The simple truth is, there is only IBM and ITT and AT&T, or whatever names those corporations operate under now, and they don't care the first thing about you. They aren't people, they're corporations. They care about, are created, charted, and under legislative dictum to care about, only the bottom line. Left to themselves, they will chew up the earth and spit it out in little pieces, strewing pieces of bone and hair through a barren landscape. They are mechanisms, soulless to their core, and they don't want democracy, they don't want you to have equality and dignity, they want profit. We are, indeed, trying to meddle with the primal forces of nature in this election, and whatever happens, we may not be able to meddle enough. But I want you to know that we really do have a lot to lose. It's more than Kucinich talked about, more than John Edwards told us, it's more along the lines of what we heard from Arthur Jensen over thirty years ago. We've allowed it to happen, and now it's reached us in every part of our lives, and we have to choose now if that's still the way that it's going to be.

It's incredible they would actually give us the chance to choose, isn't it? If it sounds too good to be true, then it probably is. What we can really do is mostly push back just a little, hold it off while we marshal our forces and add reinforcements, and keep hanging on. Maybe there is no America and no democracy, but there's still just enough an appearance of it that we can find a reason for hope, and a way to move forward. As we applaud ourselves for all this, millions more will die without hope, ExxonMobil will gouge out more wounds in the earth, and more profits will go to the few while the many are starving. All this will happen almost unaffected by even the most optimistic outcome of this year's selection process. If you think we will find a hero, please think again. This is just about a once-in-a-lifetime chance to make a difference, but even then, in the whole scheme of things, it's a drop in a storm.

Many of you are afraid to take any sort of a chance. Let someone make you a soothing promise, and you're all ears. Daddy would never hurt you, would he? I hate to break it to you. There are an awful lot of bad daddies in the world, and there's been an awful lot of hurt. I wish I could take what's inside me right now and transmit it directly. Once it's put into words, it's all relative and subject to doubts. I'll tell you what I know with the only tools I have. Over the years, we've made a lot of bad choices. We've allowed ourselves to be fooled so many times by all the ways that have been devised to manage the outcome, by propaganda -- don't kid yourself -- that's reached a level of efficiency with the modern media so overwhelming that it's amazing we can have any sense of the truth at all.

We've had no shortage of courageous examples who tell us about how things really are. We've had our Orwells, our Chayevskys, our Zinns and Chomskys. Now we can take just a moment and think if they might not be right, if we might not be sliding in our meek passivity right down the cosmic drain and into oblivion. We have to consider if we, in the long run, are being controlled. I'm asking you now, can you really imagine we aren't? Do you really think that wealth and power are benign? Do you really imagine that their continually redefined definition of our security is any security at all, instead of a dreamy opiate of lies? You think you can keep your nose clean and retire, and the truth is you'll end up working until you die. In one future, the elderly have no recourse and are left to wither, the sick and infirm are discarded, the weak are crushed. The profits are all that will matter, and they will grow, and among the few there will be the opulent trappings of kings. Keep on voting as you have been, my friends. We'll be there soon.

I recorded the film Network and watched it the other night. I'd forgotten that one of my old friends was in it. Her name is Conchata Ferrell (Chatti to us). She and I were part of a circle of friends that saw the protests, and the Manhattan theater scene, in the sixties and seventies. We were part of a very close-knit group that grew apart. Chatti was a close friend of my first, perhaps only, Great Love, and was witness to all my passionate suffering for that girl's affection, and much more over the years. I was always shy, and much of what Chatti knew of me was of someone so twisted up in his emotions he was barely sane, but I know those years meant just as much to her as me, and I bet I still cross her mind in some way when she thinks of that time. If I think of you now as I watched your wonderful movie, Chatti, it's not for the fame you've enjoyed; I've had my successes as well. It's for that time when we all lived with complete intensity, truly candles that burned completely in each instant of time. I hope you're well. You were great in Network. You're better now than you were even then, because you were perfect.

the book

The book fascinated him, or more exactly it reassured him. In a sense it told him nothing that was new, but that was part of the attraction. It said what he would have said, if it had been possible for him to set his scattered thoughts in order. It was the product of a mind similar to his own, but enormously more powerful, more systematic, less fear-ridden. The best books, he perceived, were those that tell you what you know already.

--George Orwell, 1984

I finished re-reading 1984 (yesterday, actually), and it generated some strong impressions. I'm sure it made an impression when I last read it early in college, but in many respects I certainly wasn't ready for the book at that time. I repurchased the book the other day, since my original copy appears to be yet another book that was somehow bequeathed to my ex-wife during the divorce. It's not actually necessary to buy the book now. You can read it online here: http://www.george-orwell.org/1984/index.html

The passage I've cited above is just after Winston Smith has finished reading a section of "the book", the underground treatise by Emmanuel Goldstein and the shadowy Brotherhood of resistance to The Party. Smith's sentiments echo some of my own reactions to "the book", and to Orwell's book in general. I expected to sense some echoes of today in the themes of this classic, but there were more than echoes. I think that in many ways 1984 already happened. Take, for instance, "the book"'s description of the ideal Party member:

Even the humblest Party member is expected to be competent, industrious, and even intelligent within narrow limits, but it is also necessary that he should be a credulous and ignorant fanatic whose prevailing moods are fear, hatred, adulation, and orgiastic triumph. In other words it is necessary that he have a mentality appropriate to a state of war.

-- excerpt from "the book", George Orwell, 1984

I know these guys!

The shock of recognition occurred all too frequently throughout the book, and "the book". We have, in too many ways, allowed ourselves to become a managed society, with narrow parameters for the range of thought we're actually allowed to have, and certainly for what we're allowed to read and hear from the media. The first quote reminds me of my own reaction to Chomsky. He presents a framework, not for my paranoid fantasies, but rather for my human instincts with regard to the world around me. Orwell's book is a companion volume in that collection.

I might turn this into a longer rant, and perhaps will at some point. Right now, I'm trying just to make the thought somewhat coherent, and publish.

Down with Big Brother.

Down with Big Brother.

Down with Big Brother.

Democracy Now!

Ideally, I prefer to jump around the various alternate media outlets when I point to sources that I think are relevant, but Amy Goodman's Democracy Now! has outdone itself with today's broadcast. Here is a link:

http://www.democracynow.org/shows/2008/1/3

The show explores two topics of great relevance to our lives -- the presidential race, and the situation in Pakistan. The very fact of this broadcast might be deemed as sufficient evidence that the mainstream media is failing us completely. There is probably as much or more very important information provided here within a few minutes than all the mainstream media coverage combined. In addition, it features, among other thought-provoking speakers, journalist Allan Nairn, who views the election with an unashamedly "Chomskyesque" perspective. I almost felt I was listening to Chomsky himself, although that's uncharitable. Mr. Nairn is quite eloquent in his own right, and there's nothing particularly esoteric about Professor Chomsky's perspective, anyway. The astonishing thing is when you apply the most basic morality to the topic of American foreign policy, the problems of our world quickly achieve the status of actions for which we must take personal responsibility and endeavor to correct as quickly as possible.

The theme of the coverage for the presidential race was a look at the people who are solicited to advise the various candidates. The rogues gallery of advisors in every camp offers a dim prospect for real change from any corner, including the most progressive. It lends credence to my claim on New Year's Day that this crop of hopefuls is likely to still disappoint, and emphasizes how much work we need to do to bring new perspective to American government.

The conclusion reached by Goodman, Nairn and fellow journalist Kelly Vlahos was that there is almost no difference between the candidates, even across party lines. My own opinion is there is some significant difference regarding some domestice policies, and even in foreign policy, which was the focus in this context. As we've seen all too often, however, foreign policy problems result from both Democratic and Republican administrations. Mr. Nairn is at his most eloquent when he makes the most natural, and most Chomskyesque, connection between American foreign policy and human rights abuses around the world. Speaking of Hillary Clinton's advisors, for example:

Madeleine Albright, she was the main force behind the Iraq sanctions that killed more than 400,000 Iraqi civilians. General Wesley Clark, he was the one who ran the bombing of Serbia in the former Yugoslavia, came out and publicly said that he was going after civilian targets, like electrical plants, like the TV station there. Richard Holbrooke, in the Carter administration he was the one who oversaw the shipment of weapons to the Indonesian military as they were invading—illegally invading East Timor and killing a third of the population there, and he was the one who kept the UN Security Council from enforcing its resolution against that invasion. Strobe Talbott, he was the one who, during the Clinton administration, oversaw Russia policy, a backing of Yeltsin, which resulted in turning over the national wealth to the oligarchs and a drop in life expectancy in much of Russia of about fifteen years—massive, massive death. And you have various backers of the Iraq invasion and occupation and the recent escalation, people like General Jack Keane, Michael O’Hanlon and others. That’s just Clinton.

Mr. Nairn is actually being somewhat conservative in his accounting of such events as the tragic sanctions on Iraqi citizens. It was in 1999, I believe, that Madeleine Albright was asked on 60 Minutes about reports that the sanctions had led to the deaths of half a million Iraqi children. She responded that she thought it was worth it. I remember that one.

None of the candidates look very impressive regarding their choice of advisers, including Obama, and when you consider how independent Obama's internet financing could allow him to be, it's very troubling. I'm hoping that, as we become more clearly aware that we are our brother's keeper, we can continue to put more people in office who balk, as we would, at these abuses. I'm betting that most of you, when you're made aware of what's going on, will be active in helping to put some genuinely moral, and preferably courageous, people in office, and as long as facilities such as this open internet -- and Amy Goodman's Democracy Now! -- exist, you're going to be made aware.

The second segment about Pakistan is just disturbing, and well worth your time if you watch the entire show. It's a more realistic look at Benazir Bhutto, along with legitimate concerns over how many Al Qaeda sympathizers might have infiltrated Pakistan's half-million strong military with potential access to their nuclear weapons. Can you say "blowback"?

All we can do is take things one step at a time. Vote for your candidate, and work on those candidates after they're elected, in particular to enable full public funding of elections. One of the problems with public funding is the courts tend to view spending limits as unconstitutional, and they're likely to find new justifications to limit public funding in the future. This is probably an excellent candidate for constitutional amendment. We have-nots are going to have a tough time battling the haves until big money is neutralized in election politics.

I can lead you horses to water, but it's still up to you. Please, please watch this show. I promise you it will be among the most valuable time you spend on this year's presidential election.

What We Owe To George Bush

Satar Jabar has a difficult day at Abu Ghraib

A government which deliberately enacts injustice, and persists in it, will ever become the laughing-stock of the world.

-- Henry David Thoreau

Try to look at the bright side. One day, we might look back and have to admit that we owe a great debt of gratitude to George Bush. No, I don't believe he will be vindicated by history, but it is possible that he will be seen as having inspired the people of the United States to confront great moral decisions with profound consequences for the world.

At this time, Congress, and the general public, is being asked to consider a new Attorney General of the United States to fill the post left vacant by the infamous Alberto Gonzales. The nominee, Michael Mukasey, would like to be confirmed despite his complete lack of clarity regarding practices of torture such as waterboarding. It has reached the stage where some citizens have taken it upon themselves to defend this practice as legitimate effort to acquire accurate and actionable information necessary to defend the liberty and freedom of Americans. The "debate", such as it is, mirrors numerous others in our society, and assists in sharpening the focus of a fundamental dichotomy. We are now forced to start making these decisions inside a context that defines our perception of ourselves as human beings. Thanks in no small part to George Bush, we are near to making the kind of brutally honest self-assessments we might otherwise have managed to avoid for at least another generation, probably more. I think we should be grateful.

I've had some brief conversations recently with some of my friends from Microsoft, but not enough to get any sense of their reactions to current events. There are a couple of guys I'd like to talk to, so I'm putting that on my to-do list. I don't know of many workplaces that allow politics to creep in very much, but everyone talks a little, and I'd like to have more perspective on how my colleagues have reacted to the stark exposures of the last few months. I tend to expect an understated response, but you never know.

A segment today on Keith Olbermann's Countdown discussed the difficulties with Mr. Mukasey's confirmation, aired the reactions today from President Bush, and offered some analysis from Newsweek's Jonathan Alter. Mr. Alter makes some very good points, but I was most struck when he noted that "there's a kind of cognitive dissonance here that's breathtaking." I've heard that term "cognitive dissonance" many times, and I'm sure I've even used it more than once. But quick! Tell me what it means, without looking it up! Hmm. Before looking it up, I see the word "cognitive" and know that refers to the thought process. "Dissonance" I'm a little fuzzier on, but I believe it's similar to "discordant" when referring to musical sound. Let's look it up: cognitive dissonance. (I'm hooked on Wikipedia. A side note: when I look up "dissonance" by itself, and also when I look up "discordant", I'm directed to the topic "consonance and dissonance" that defines "dissonance", and presumably some variant of "discordant", as "the quality of sounds which seems "unstable", and has an aural need to "resolve" to a "stable" consonance. At any rate ...) The Wikipedia definition begins: "Cognitive dissonance is a psychological term describing the uncomfortable tension that may result from having two conflicting thoughts at the same time, or from engaging in behavior that conflicts with one's beliefs, or from experiencing apparently conflicting phenomena."

So, "cognitive dissonance" can refer to a conflict in one's belief, or value, system. I know this is getting terribly convoluted, but we're working our way back around now. The issue of torture is a perfect microcosm of the larger cognitive dissonances I've been describing in my last few blogs. We as a nation are poised to sign off on a policy that diverges so fundamentally from our human instincts that we have, finally, stopped for a moment, possibly genetically unable to simply press on in our usual numbness, and instead we're forced to confront ourselves in something approaching genuine self-appraisal. Thanks, George!

That waterboarding is torture can't really even be open to question. The victim feels she is drowning, because she is. She is then brought back, from the brink as it were, and made to endure it yet again, perhaps many times. Afterwards, there are no physical scars or disfigurement, but mentally and emotionally, PTSD might be one way to describe the residual symptoms, not to mention the potential for complications such as pneumonia due to the large amounts of water that had been forced into her lungs.

Rear Admiral John Hutson testified at the confirmation hearings. Rear Admiral Hutson is an officer, a lawyer, judge advocate general of the Navy, and recipient of more medals and awards than I feel like recounting here. He was testifying at his second confirmation of an Attorney General, having also testified against the confirmation of Alberto Gonzales. After some formal statements, Admiral Hutson offered some additional comments:

You know, torture is the method of choice of the lazy, the stupid and the pseudo-tough. And that should not be the United States. No matter how you define torture. It's unconstitutional, it violates statutes, it violates the UCMJ, it violates Common Article 3, it violates what your mother taught you and it violates what you learned in kindergarten. And we ought not be even close to it.

...

Other than, perhaps the rack and thumbscrews, water-boarding is the most iconic example of torture in history. It was devised, I believe, in the Spanish Inquisition. It has been repudiated for centuries.

It's a little disconcerting to hear now that we're not quite sure where water-boarding fits in the scheme of things.

Disconcerting. A disconcerting cognitive dissonance.

A lie.

I appreciate what George Bush has done for us as a nation. He has brought us together perhaps as no other President before him. We stand amid the rubble of our seemingly adolescent image of our country as a protecter of our value system, and have found it to be an abusive father. We are without question in a state of shock, but I think we're coming out of it. I am still somewhat isolated by my condition, but I imagine the murmurings in offices and break rooms, over drinks after hours, even in meetings and town halls across the country, and of course, on the internet, where I see it happening. We know we have to come together and make some decisions.

We can see the unspeakable horror that is Iraq. We can hear Hamid Karzai's plea from Afghanistan for America to stop dropping bombs on his people. We hear the world's disillusionment with America, even if Bush and Cheney do not, and our pride is deeply wounded.

We have heard of the Hadley Rules, or perhaps you may not have heard them. If not, you can scan through this article by Scott Ritter, called On the Eve of Destruction for more information. Ritter almost seems to imply that American policy, as defined by National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley, is something new, but my reading reveals it as much more a consistent continuation of the long-standing policies of American "Exceptionalism" than is commonly accepted. Nevertheless, the positions implied by Mr. Hadley are shocking in themselves. Negotiation with an adversary such as Iran is deemed to be stalemated until Iran accepts the view of the United States, or there can be no negotiation. That this is nothing like real negotiation is apparently irrelevant. The United States is, quite literally, correct simply because it is the United States.

The underbelly of American government has never been so completely exposed, again thanks to George Bush and his temptingly small group of allies. If we peer at it closely enough, we may actually see the disgusting bloat that has fed the wealthy and the privileged, the military and industrial elite, at the expense of all the rest of Americans since the Constitution was first ratified and immediately hijacked for private ends. If we are finally shocked sufficiently, we just might awaken.

I have a decent reading voice, and have considerable storage facility reserved for me on the internet. I'm considering whether to pursue negotiation with Professor Chomsky's publishers regarding the possibility of my podcasting a chapter a day of his latest two books. Maybe there is a way to get it all into this blog.

The Experts, Pt. 2

I had intended to send my second thought bubble on experts floating out through the netsphere yesterday, but there were many interruptions. Of course, in the interest of honesty, I wasn't entirely sure what that second bubble was about. My overall point is fairly simple, so I'll try to state that here for clarity: expertise is very valuable, but it tends to stifle creative approaches without sufficient feedback from external sources, including novices. Well, that was easy. I would be surprised to find any substantial disagreement with that point of view.

I suspect what's behind the clash of thinking processes is often some basic difference between the value systems of the individuals involved. For a programmer developing a large application, the value system can become skewed in esoteric directions that have little to do with usability, while a user can quite intimidate a developer with his or her wide-ranging knowledge of that application, based on a value system of practical, and even creative, interaction with the software in daily life. Fortunately, the programmer is highly motivated to provide products with features that directly respond to the value systems of the users, and a collaborative effort is made to achieve that goal. This has worked out very well, for the most part, in the world of software.

Much of today's world might be viewed in terms of similar conflicting value systems, and much of what seems broken might be symbolized by the dysfunctional cooperation between those whose value systems do not coincide. This way of looking at the problem could be extended in so many different directions it's hard to know where to begin, but there are three I want to mention initially here, and return to from time to time in future posts. They are:

• American foreign policy and the average American's view of that policy
• Corporate policies and the average American's view of their policies
• Religious doctrine and, again, the average American's view of that doctrine

In each of the three areas above, there is a schism between the posture of a given entity, and the American people themselves. In each case, something of the collaborative process appears to be fundamentally ineffectual. Why should this be? What would short-circuit such a basic process that enjoys such success in environments like that between a software company and its users? With regard to software, a primary motivation for maintaining the balance is competition. If one company's developers don't listen to the users, another company's developers will. Some might refer to that as a "free market", but there can frequently be a dearth of real competition in a free market. In my personal experience, the best software has always been as a result of spirited competition for users between rival applications. Where there are problems related to the list above, it is often a lack of competition that contributes greatly to those problems.

I'm rummaging through all these concepts to try and build some framework for the perspectives I've gained by the reading and study I've been undertaking to try and understand what's behind the unholy mess everyone seems to be making of our lovely little earth. Even a moderately sane human being could only describe the major forces at work in the world today as perverse, or perhaps even the height of madness. I want to find some handy, accessible frames of reference because I've found there is method to be discovered beneath the chaos, and that's the most troubling aspect of all. It's one thing to feel that we're careening out of control. It's quite another to feel controlled. But there it is.

I have finished Noam Chomsky's Hegemony or Survival, and am nearly halfway through Howard Zinn's A Power Governments Cannot Suppress. These are books which stand against some elements the authors see as highly intentional, not some muddied result of poor planning, but from the perspective of average folks like you and I, an opposing force. I can't compel you to read these books, but now that I have, I need to find ways to integrate the perspective I've gained into this blog in a meaningful way that relates to shared knowledge. I don't expect I'll be able to accomplish that overnight, but I believe such an effort can be useful.

A lot of it is about respect. I developed a deep respect for the experts at Microsoft, and an equal respect for the armies of users. I encountered an application, then known as Outlook Express, and now, Windows Mail, from the perspective of bits and bytes, and hundreds of thousands of lines of code that, after some natural recoil from what seemed an enormous task, taught me to respect the subtle, intricate structure of the creation as it existed before my intrusion into its arcane world. After much study, what had seemed like random flights of fancy revealed beauties of design all the more satisfying because those secrets were only revealed when I had applied myself with sufficient effort to make myself ready to receive them. At Microsoft, software can have mystical overtones!

I have learned a little about respect, and the rewards that can be gained when sufficient respect is paid to the object of interest. The Zen of everyday life might be described as learning to have genuine respect with regard to all we encounter. So I do feel motivated to treat these questions with sufficient respect. As an indication of that, I will respect what seems like a good place to stop for the moment. If I've given the reader anything to consider further here, I will be pleased; but this is also for my benefit. Some parts of them will continue to rattle around in my head for the next day or two, until I know it's time to let some more of them spill out on my keyboard.

Too Much Truth

There are many ways to promote democracy at home, carrying it to new
dimensions. Opportunities are ample, and failure to grasp them is likely to have
ominous repercussions: for the country, for the world, and for future
generations.
-- Noam Chomsky, Failed States

How much truth is too much? Can you handle the truth? I've been trying to learn a few things about what's true and what isn't these last few months, and I feel as if I've climbed at least a plateau or two in understanding. I'd like to be able to communicate some of that here, for what it's worth, but this is just a personal blog, just a half-step above Dear Diary. The longest of my entries, printed out, would barely cover five pages. Who wants to read a long blog? Go read a book or something. I'm just posting a few pictures, a few videos, and trying to say a few short words to express how I feel, and allow random chance to find a receptive reader. If you're looking for War and Peace, this ain't the place. But there's a Pulitzer Prize winner in my immediate family (have I ever lied to you?), and while I'm not likely ever to receive Joseph's highest honor, I'm not afraid to think that I might have just a little bit of my own worth saying.

I've completed Noam Chomsky's Failed States, and have begun reading Hegemony or Survival. There are many who find Chomsky's point of view disturbing. That's a laugh, because it certainly is. Everyone has a point of view, and Noam Chomsky is no exception, but we can try and stick to the facts; they're quite sufficient. You don't have to be a student of the Noam Chomsky School of Philosophy, or whatever, to study the public records with him, and others, and come away with much greater insight into the forces that shape our world.

It is a dark vision, for the most part. I won't tell you that Chomsky is an optimist, though he may be. I suspect Howard Zinn is irrepressible in his optimism, and I love him for it. Noam Chomsky doesn't let us see quite so much of himself. The facts tend to speak for themselves.

Can you handle the truth?

I have followed this process in many phases of my life. I have seen the weight of evidence collect on numerous topics until I've attained a level of knowledge about certain things. If you touch a hot stove, you'll be sorry. If you go out in the rain with your head wet, you'll catch a cold. Smoking has bitter consequences. I've learned a lot, by trial and error. I know how it works, and I know when to say I understand.

We here in America are in the midst of momentous crisis. We are in danger of losing democracy if we're not careful. We are indeed being manipulated, make no mistake. The overwhelming majority in this country is deeply at odds with the direction we're headed, and we're being lulled to sleep by propaganda and American Idol. You, you conservative Evangelic Christian. You, you Wall Street Administrative Assistant. You, you soldier headed out for your third tour in Iraq. You are being toyed with and played for just a pathetic sucker. You have to fight!

What can you say in a little blog? After all that I've learned, what can I tell you? That politicians are corrupt, corporations are greedy, and nobody gives a damn about the little guy? Well, hot dang, you could have told me that! You don't need me! There's no room for the details here. I can't take you through it with me. But I can tell you that the devil really does reside in those details, and He's (did I really just capitalize that?) just as strong as ever. The playing field has always been tilted toward the elite and privileged, that isn't news. What's news is that it's gotten a lot more serious, and things are moving quickly now. Specific measures have been, and are being, undertaken that profoundly erode our freedoms. It's a pattern with historical parallels, and you know what they say about those who don't learn from history. It's just that we here in America can't afford to fall victim to that vicious cycle, not here, not now. The stakes are much too high, for us, and for the world.

LISTEN!

The United States of America is largely controlled by corporations. That's upside down. Now, I don't hate corporations. I really, truly, love Microsoft, for all its flaws. But how many times can we be told that power corrupts before we actually believe it? The Ring of Power corrupts all who wear it, and it's a burden that must be fully shared, if we're to go forward. I am here to tell you that a struggle is beginning now that has all the earmarks of being more terrible than we could ever imagine, far, far worse than World War II. I am here to tell you just how bad it really is.

We live in a perfect storm of global crisis, of which we're dimly, barely aware. We're literally melting the polar ice caps off our planet because we're madly uncontrolled, in a world whose religion has become the Bottom Line. We've already become immersed in this climate of fear, and by my speaking out in this manner, I think I may actually risk imprisonment and torture. It's happened already, and it will happen again. You and I, the vast majority, from all walks of life and all points of view, are, unbeknown to our everyday selves, already hostage, and smack dab in the middle of the fight of our unassuming lives.

With our dwindling resources, our overheating globe, our rapidly (thank God!) awakening public, and the growing impatience of the really nasty ones to get their power base sewn up once and for all, the battle lines are being more clearly drawn. I'm not sure which factor will finally push us off the edge, but the cliff is near, and I can see it, and you will, too. The lobster in the pot doesn't know he's being boiled, but I strongly suspect there's at least one moment of bright awareness. Do you have a boiling point? You are, I guarantee you, about to find out.

Take a breath, now. Calm down. I'm here. It's all right. We're going to get through this. I have a little blog I write occasionally over on Barack Obama's web site, and on my Profile Page I paid homage to Yoda for my favorite quote:

"Fear is the path to the dark side: fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate leads to suffering."
-- Yoda (Star Wars: Episode I)

I'm a little angry now myself, a little afraid, but I'll get over it. "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself." (Who said that?) I don't believe we're all evil. I believe there are billions of people in the world who just want to do the right thing. I am saying that we're not the ones in control now, and that the ones who are, are the same ones who've been there all through recorded time. They don't like you and me much. We were very foolish to trust them. Stop listening to their commercials, their mindless entertainment, and remember how truly dignified and noble you really are.

We're not powerless, not yet, anyway. The incredible thing about the United States of America is that its underlying structure is still based on the noblest ideals. That's the really dangerous thing about democracy with regard to the rich and powerful; there's always the chance the people themselves could win!

(Upcoming: On Monday, October 15th, I'll publish a blog in honor of Blog Action Day, when over 12,000 bloggers on blogger.com will all write a piece on the environment for an audience of millions. I suspect I'll write about Al Gore's Nobel award, and related issues. Then on Thursday, October 18th, stay tuned for my Sixtieth Birthday blog, and see what I write while in a drunken, self-pitying stupor.)

Consciousness

I've tried to think at times about how we've changed in the years I've been around to see it. A mere six decades isn't much in the scheme of things, and human nature changes slowly. But an awful lot has happened, and I think there are times when change happens more quickly. Some of the most fundamental changes happened in the first half of the twentieth century, just as I was appearing on the scene. But I could make a pretty good argument that there's been more dynamic changes for the human race in the last sixty years than ever before, probably far more. And we've been changed by it, in ways we're still evaluating.

I'm not sure I can do justice to this topic this evening. Not the very best day, health-wise. Doctor visit. New round of meds, starting all over, that's no fun, and I'm not feeling that great, but I'll get better. I'll try to finish this tomorrow.

Well, that was fun. I'm feeling a little better, so let's give this a shot. Consciousness. Funny how that's one of the things we think least clearly about. My generation grew into adulthood while engaging some big questions about the nature of consciousness. I was in college during the Vietnam War era. I led protests, including a large one after the Kent State shootings. Interesting story for later. I lived in Greenwich Village in the Sixties and Seventies, and partook (I looked it up, that's the right word) of all the good, and some of the bad, things that Greenwich Village had to offer during that time. It was amazing! From there eventually to Microsoft and the cutting edge technology mindset, I've seen a lot of Consciousness in this era up close and personal, and overall, I'd say there's a lot of positives in our Progress Report for the last sixty years. We haven't changed human nature very much, but I think we see it much, much more clearly, and in exponentially increasing numbers. That's really quite a statement when you think about it, and I believe it, don't you?

Talking about Consciousness, I'm taking occasional license to ramble, in a stream-of sort of way. You, Dear Reader, might wonder why you should bother to follow any of this. Well, that's up to you, for the most part, but I'll give you one assurance, and all I can do is ask you to trust me on this: I am always trying to tell the absolute truth as best I know it. If I make a mistake, I will try to correct it. I think our Consciousness has been harmed by the ubiquity of lies we've had to contend with, and if you've caught any of the tone of these blogs, none of it makes any sense if I'm dishonest. I'm too old to lie, people. No point in it.

(Rambling again.) There's a little story about me that will help prove my point. I don't really want to make this blog too personal, except in a Zen sort of way, but on occasion, I think it's ok. This happened a long time ago. I was living in Manhattan with my wife, and I cheated on her. That was a stupid, lousy thing to do, and I'm not proud of it. It did indeed end up destroying the marriage, and I knew what I'd done long before the actual divorce. Ironically, I was starring in a small production of Arthur Miller's The Crucible at the time, and got much too caught up in the charms of one of my co-stars. The lead character in that play is John Proctor, whose situation had a fascinating parallel with my real life (and with the actress who played the lover in the play), and I've thought about that often since then. John Proctor's tragedy was that of broken trust, and so was mine. It gave me a very profound sense of the importance of trust. I vowed afterwards that I would never compromise my honesty in any way. For me, it's how I can hold my head up in the world, and it really has been the guiding principle of my life ever since. You don't have to believe me, but it might help if you know that Honest is something I've been working on for a long time.

So. Consciousness.

We still have a lot of misconceptions about Consciousness. In Greenwich Village, the thing you wanted to do was alter it. That had its moments, believe me, and you might think with zazen I'm still trying to alter Consciousness, but I think you'd miss the point. By now, I've learned to be fully content with the Consciousness I've already got, thank you very much. I'm not looking to alter it any more. (Ok, well, at least not in the current context.) I don't think Zen is about "altering Consciousness" at all. It's just about taking the time to stop and calm down for a minute, that's all. We really need to do that on a regular basis, and we'll all think more clearly. Most Westerners haven't figured this out yet, but that's really all there is to it. Zen de-mystified! So, what's "Zen Enlightenment", then? I've already said that. It's "love thy neighbor as thyself" with all your heart. 'Nuff said.

OK, so has our Consciousness changed in the last sixty years? Good grief, yes, don't you think so? There's so much to consider on this topic. We've seen education improvements for massive population groups, staggering proliferation of information through print, television and digital media. We've altered Consciousness in ways we hardly dreamed of even in Chelsea. Exhilarating, confusing, overwhelming, that's been the times we've lived in. Now, at long last, the Hippies are starting to retire. I'm a little ahead of the pack, due to my condition. I've been struck by the thought I'm a bit like the canary in the mine. My generation has been really, really smart (and vice versa) in many ways, but so many of us have gravitated to intense careers such as I've had at Microsoft. I've been aware of the world, but just through a narrow window while my professional life took precedence, and took over, for the most part. Now that I have some time, and have looked around to get a better idea of what's really been going on, it's pretty shocking. Those of you who are still too busy with your life, especially those who are close to my age, make sure you're sitting down when it all sinks in. There are momentous issues on the table right now, and, if we survive long enough for the bulk of my generation to retire, I think we're going to have a whole lot of people in this country waking up to what's going on with a "WTF???" I'm just telling you. I thought I was on top of things, I saw through Bush and all that, but oh man, I didn't know. We got problems.

If we can just hang on, though, this Consciousness gives us a lot of reason for hope. If we can keep the lines open, there is information available in this still-gloriously-free society, that will lift some serious scales from our aging eyes. My generation is going to see through so much of the sham and nonsense of this age, to a degree I'm not sure we can even begin to imagine. I really predict this, write it down. My generation will reinvigorate its quest for the truth as the demands of career wind down, and there are truths within our grasp so beautiful, I have no words.

I try to comment here about our search for truth and meaning, and shed any light I'm able to on how to overcome some of the hurdles placed in our path. I'm being so inspired right now by the writings of Noam Chomsky, as I've been saying, and I still have much study to do before I can really claim to have enough command of his broad-ranging knowledge to treat it responsibly, but it's a revelation to see how minds like Chomsky's can bring us closer to really understanding the forces that shape our lives. It's very significant that he brings the linguistic discipline to this task, because that discipline helps immensely to keep him honest and objective, even scientific in his approach when possible. There are other minds, of course, and the more I can grasp of the language of Chomsky, the more accessible will those other minds become. I only know English, to my shame, but I know many languages. I am an expert in C++, which contributed to expertise in C#, VB, and so on. Understanding one language can lead to many others.

We've come a long way, and we've helped to place our own roadblocks to bar the path ahead. We're still making war, and lying, and raping the earth. We may last until my generation retires, but we may not. Just to let you know, though, if we make it, if we have time to sit down and take stock for a minute, look out!

Machinations

I'm not a smart man... but I know what love is.
-- Forrest Gump

I am somewhat squeamish, but I steeled myself to keep from averting my eyes during the final scenes of Ken Burns' The War on PBS last Tuesday evening. I saw piles upon piles of corpses "stacked like cords of wood", as more than one witness had described. There's nothing quite like a 50-inch plasma display to maximize the impact of a video moment. All over the world, only a few short years ago, life had become a commodity of minimal value. As I switched off the TV and turned my attention to our modern world, I felt how deeply vulnerable we may be to the chance of its happening again.

The issue is ... whether we want to live in a free society or whether we want to live under what amounts to a form of self-imposed totalitarianism, with the bewildered herd marginalized, directed elsewhere, terrified, screaming patriotic slogans, fearing for their lives and admiring with awe the leader who saved them from destruction, while the educated masses goose-step on command and repeat the slogans they're supposed to repeat and the society deteriorates at home. We end up serving as a mercenary enforcer state, hoping that others are going to pay us to smash up the world. Those are the choices That's the choice that you have to face. The answer to those questions is very much in the hands of people like you and me.

-- Noam Chomsky, Media Control

Noam Chomsky was described in the New York Times as "arguably the most important intellectual alive." In September of 2006, Hugo Chavez displayed Chomsky's book Hegemony or Survival to world leaders at the United Nations, describing it as "an excellent book to help us understand what has been happening in the world throughout the 20th century." Of course, Chavez also expressed regret at not being able to meet with Chomsky before his death (Chomsky is very much alive), so one must reserve a degree of skepticism for Mr. Chavez' acumen. Osama bin Laden, in his video earlier this year, referred to Chomsky as "among the most capable of those from your side who speak to you on this topic." (Hey, with endorsements like that, who needs the Times Book Review?) Pat Tillman's mother, and Chomsky, have confirmed that a meeting had been arranged between Tillman and Chomsky on his return from Afghanistan. I suspect all, or at least the vast majority, regret that meeting did not take place.

I mention these references to highlight the really stunning impact this individual is having on the world. I have purchased three of his books -- Failed States, Hegemony or Survival, and The Chomsky Reader. I'm reading Failed States now, so I'm working backwards, I guess, but there's also so much material on the internet that it's somewhat slow progress. (Of course, there were the Ohio State and Cleveland Browns football games as well.) Chomsky is a complex man with complex thoughts, so I don't want to try and summarize him too quickly. But to underestimate his importance is to ignore the world.

What is the message that resonates so strongly with those who stand against U.S. foreign policies? If such a man as Osama bin Laden praises him, why should we even care? The ancient Greek philosopher Antisthines said "There are only two people who can tell you the truth about yourself - an enemy who has lost his temper, and a friend who loves you dearly." Osama bin Laden has unquestionably lost his temper, but I suspect Noam Chomsky loves us dearly. To this point, he appears to be telling us the truth, no matter how painful. We need to care, and I'm saying that Chomsky is only trying to warn us before it's too late.

If you've passed safely through the gauntlet of disinformation to appreciate that global warming is a fact, you also need to know that scientists are seeing that the process is occurring much faster than estimates had indicated. This crisis alone is more than sufficient to make us stop and take notice, but Chomsky elevates our awareness of the patterns of our overall behavior, and a much broader view of its causes and effects. The most critical problem of all is that we're heading in the wrong direction, and we're not slowing down, we're speeding up.

One of the "strongest" objections to Chomsky -- though not particularly strong, in my opinion -- is that the policies of the United States are infinitely preferable to the alternative, and ultimately result in humanitarian benefits over time. I would respond that the policies of the United States are infinitely less preferable than a revitalized policy founded principally on fundamental human rights. It represents a great lack of faith, to my mind, that we despair of making serious attempts to reform the destructive elements of the machineries of progress we've unleashed upon the world. I want to believe that we have far too much potential simply to ride on the runaway train and shout ahead with warnings.

It's not necessary to read Chomsky to get the feeling that the window of time for making adjustments may be closing, but it helps. The array of information he provides is available as a matter of public record, and the scrupulous methodology that has made him the most important linguistic scholar of our time is applied with vigor to these topics as well. It's not a matter of refuting his information, because he's simply repeating what is well known. The difference is his genius, and of course the enormous applied effort that is the real secret of genius, that allows him to broaden our view of events to include a much larger range of causes and effects, and perceive the underlying patterns. It's hard to imagine a more fitting toolset for understanding our world than a mastery of the basic elements of communication.

The problems of our world, when viewed in the historical and political contexts provided by such scholars as Noam Chomsky and Howard Zinn, can be overwhelming. Many of us have a growing fear that it may already be too late, so why even bother? I can't even comprehend that point of view, so I'll allow that to pass without further comment. I do believe that there's an excellent chance things are going to get much worse. I could have made that into a more comforting phrase such as "things are going to get much worse before they get better," but the truth is, by the very nature of our crises, it's more prudent to have placed the period to the sentence right where I put it. When concern about these issues is sufficient to have reached critical mass, there will be a response, of course, but it's increasingly likely our response will indeed have been too late.

So what should we do? I'm trying to do my part, in my small way. I really believe the most important thing is for us to simply recognize the problems. Many of us are not being very honest with ourselves, and you know who you are. Most of us are just trying to avoid being talked to like I'm doing now, and I probably can't blame you for that, there's a lot I'd rather be doing, as well. I think we should try to see "things as it is", as Shunryu Suzuki used to say. We should practice zazen and become less rigid, less dogmatic in our interactions, and waste far less time regretting the truth than in staying open to truth in every moment.

I really am very, very hopeful. With reservations.

FUBAR!

Under the current U. S. policies, a nuclear exchange is inevitable.
-- Noam Chomsky



I stated my intention to publish a blog entry titled "FUBAR", and this is it. The title is the same as the middle episode of the Ken Burns documentary "The War", which I reviewed in my last entry. I assume you know the acronym -- F(bleep)ed Up Beyond All Recognition -- and its assimilation into the everyday slang. It is also, far too accurately, an assessment of the world today. Not entirely, from my point of view, since I'm determined to remain an optimist. The final letter of the acronym stands for Recognition, not Redemption. The key is Recognition. Even though everything's been muddied and F(bleep)ed Up, I believe Recognition is still possible, if we just try.

This blog has been invaluable as a sort of story line for my semi-retirement. To the casual observer, I know it may be difficult to see much of a pattern, but it's there. I left the Microsoft development cycle grind a little over 7 months ago because (1) I could, and (2) I have a medical condition. My plan for this time was partially dictated by my physical limitations, but I looked forward to extensive reading and zazen in a peacefully contemplative environment. As I have begun learning to appreciate the simple pleasures, the world outside has stood in stark contrast to the satisfactions I enjoyed, so I've been studying our world intensely and, of course, blogging about it.

At Microsoft, one of my biggest thrills has been seeing the actual thought processes of truly brilliant minds. As for myself, I have my moments, but with regard to pure technical intelligence and skills, I've been known more for effort than technical brilliance. I was privileged to be part of the Windows Vista development cycle virtually from the outset, and I was constantly exposed to individuals with the capacity for lightning analysis, uncanny abilities to anticipate and prepare for a dizzying array of contingencies, and just more or less shed light on the actualization of real genius in the modern world. And I'm not exaggerating. So, I've had quite an extraordinary education about the utilization of our faculties, and that constantly inspires me to apply myself now with some of the rigors and discipline of Windows development to which I've been exposed.

I'm old enough to "get" the importance of trying to have a fairly balanced view of things, and there is certainly a connection between the Zen traditions and the ancient symbols of Yin and Yang. I know a blog that begins with pictures of nuclear mushrooms doesn't bode well for the hope of a balanced perspective, but, as I mentioned earlier, this blog is a kind of narrative. This entry represents the effect of my having reached a certain stage, but the story itself is a longer one, with more balancing effects over time.

When I indicated my intention to write FUBAR!, the stated goal was to try and put into words anything I've left unsaid. Thinking about that, I realized that meant I should try to give a voice to some of the unspoken subtext and vague fears, hopefully without simply being shrill and alarmist, but with at least some real skill at assessing the landscape. Fortunately, we have no shortage of brilliant minds today who are attempting to do just that, and I have tried in these entries to provide the most relevant possible snapshots of these attempts, with modest success. But for all the brilliance of authors and journalists such as Paul Krugman and Naomi Klein, and even my hero Howard Zinn, I remained uncertain what I might say.

Perhaps I'm learning a bit about how to let things happen when they're ready, but I think I've always had some instincts in that regard. I appear to be ready to hear what Professor Noam Chomsky has to say about this world, and I believe those are the very words I'd been searching for.

The following is a transliteration of a portion of a radio interview of Chomsky by the BBC in January 2006, titled "The Biggest Challenges Facing Humankind":

Chomsky: Well I think there are two major challenges which are actually so serious that they literally endanger survival of the species. The worst of them, which is unfortunately rarely discussed, is the threat of nuclear war which has been high for a long time and is now increasing. It’s not alarmist when someone like Robert McNamara writes an article called “Apocalypse soon,” or when leading strategic analysts in the most conservative journals talk of the “appreciable risk of ultimate doom.” Primarily driven by what’s called the transformation of military in the United States, the vast increase in offensive military capacity, including steps towards militarization of space which every analyst understands, is leading potential adversaries to increase their own offensive military capacities. The Russians have done so very substantially since the Bush administration came in, the Chinese are now doing it. And all of these systems are increasingly being placed on automated response system, hair-trigger alert, that’s called “Accidents waiting to happen” in strategic analysis literature. We know our own systems fail constantly and are averted by human intervention which has only a few minutes of time, and the systems of the adversaries are much less sophisticated, much more likely to cause an accidental missile strike. Those dangers are going up very high and talk about ultimate doom and apocalypse is now not alarmist. In fact at a lower level, US intelligence analysts estimate the probability of a dirty nuclear bomb attack in the US in the next ten years is about 50%. That’s not a massive nuclear attack but enough to change the course of history dramatically, maybe end up in nuclear war. These are the things that are right at the edge. Instead of doing something about them, we’re going in the opposite direction.

Noam Chomsky has encountered a great deal of opposition for his forceful views, but I have spent much of my life studying brilliant minds, and Noam Chomsky possesses a laser beam quality of thinking I have rarely encountered, and that's saying something. He has the kind of thinking that blows my hair back when he speaks. I've seen so many brilliant people up close, both at Microsoft and in the theater districts of Manhattan, that I've also learned a bit about spotting the flaws in their brilliance, and I'm sure the same will be true for Mr. Chomsky as I continue to read and listen. But for all their flaws, let me tell you. When you have a chance to listen to genius, just drop whatever you were doing, and sit down. You're about to have your life enriched.

Here is a link to Noam Chomsky's primary web site, Chomsky.info, and two links to an extraordinary interview with both Noam Chomsky and Howard Zinn on DemocracyNow! from April of this year:

• On Iraq, Vietnam, Activism and History


• On Alan Dershowitz and Norman Finkelstein

Chomsky rose to fame as a linguist, and has extended his reputation as a searing critic of the United States and its policies. His linguistic skills are always evident in his ability to extract the core of a given context and cling to it as a buffer against all attempts to shift the topic. With focus, discipline, and an inexhaustible range of information and specific examples, Chomsky offers a vision of today's world as defined by the imperialist tendencies of great powers, the most recent example of which is the United States. Lest you think we've merely descended into a world of esoteric phrases, there are some examples below that will touch on some of the implications. If you'll excuse a brief digression, perhaps I can establish a little more context.

Paul Krugman is a famous liberal columnist for The New York Times, and his new book, The Conscience of a Liberal, will be published later this month. He is also writing a blog by the same name. I highly recommend the blog, and hope Mr. Krugman won't mind if I include a small graph from the initial blog entry that I linked to above:

This chart represents the richest 10 percent of the American population over the past 90 years. It's a very striking representation of the fate of the middle class during that time, and might serve, at the very least, as incentive to seriously question the policies that have led to such effects on the majority of American citizens. It is completely reasonable to question why we should think that the chart above reflects the collective efforts and consensus will of the general public of this powerful nation. If one has the stomach for considering the possible darker implications, it might lead to paying more attention to some of our harshest critics.

The first video below is from an old TV show called The Firing Line in 1969. It records a brief encounter between the young Mr. Chomsky and William F. Buckley. I'm including it to allow you to experience political discourse on a rarefied level compared to most of what we see today, and to see Chomsky's powerful mind in action when pitted against one of the most eloquent conservatives of the information age:



Finally, this video is from an interview with Francine Stock of the BBC at London's St. Paul's Cathedral in December of 2002. It's "spiced up" with a little multimedia introduction that gives some sense of Chomsky's real impact on the world, though it's yet to be felt with full force in the country that's been the target of most of his criticism. As an added bonus, it's introduced by the playwright Harold Pinter, whose plays helped me explore our words and meanings in many challenging ways during the years I spent in the theater. (Note: This video may have some glitches. I'm keeping an eye on it.)



As I said, I'm determined to be an optimist. I have much to learn from the speeches and writings of Mr. Chomsky, but it's more than troubling to hear this man, to be able to recognize him as more than a cut above most of us in his abilities to perceive and examine the world, and to recognize ourselves in the mirror he shoves so rudely before our faces.

The image atop this blog entry is a warning. I have travelled this path in good faith, and have come now to stand trembling before my most eloquent accuser.

I do not have an answer.