In my moments of fantasy, I imagine we create some sort of facsimile Ayan Hirsi Ali, and have "it" circulate widely, with apparently no security. We then have hidden security quietly eliminate those who attack her. I imagine we could dust off quite a few radicals this way, and track back to some of their supporters.

In my darker moments, I wonder why the West has lost much of its sense of self preservation. I don't know if it is self guilt, or if we are fat and satiated, and can't be bothered to worry about threats.

Amy -

I will add my (small) voice to the chorus on this one. Dovetails nicely with the issue that I emailed you about.

It is extremely disturbing, this trend towards western countries allowing critical voices to be silenced so easily. Bad enough when they make laws stifling freedom of expression, even expression that is repugnant. But dropping the protection on someone who has been so bold as Ayan Hirsi Ali, in the circumstances in which it was done, should send a shutter of fear through all who live in the "enlightened" west.

Yesterday on the Beeb there was a story about an upcoming election in Switzerland. Apparently they do things California-style, with the whole country voting on almost everything all the time. Well whaddyaknow, but one of the big issues for next time is immigration. I couldn't believe that the imagery they were using in campaign posters was as coarse as the kazoo-throated 'presenter' described it to be, but it turns out it was: http://urltea.com/1qvk

See link in next message for another one... Note that even if you don't know the language (and I don't even know what the language is called) you'll be able to translate the slogans.

http://urltea.com/1qvj

It's not just the abject racism that's so despicable about this. It's the zero sum thinking that lets an artist dream of a box filled with white-crossed chips of crimson Swissy Goodness... But there are only so many of them, so we need to dole them out carefully! Otherwise we'll run out!

We give ourselves a lot of shit in the United States, and everyone I know has problems regarding immigration from Mexico. But we know a lot more about how immigration can work than any other country, and how it can work to create value for everyone.

(Two favorite [non-sex] words from English: Create value. We do it all time, and people don't even recognize it, as Doomy was getting at above.)

So anyway, when you see atrocities like that being published this deeply into the 21st century, and then you see fuckups like the handling of Hirsi Ali, you might find yourself wondering: Why exactly were we supposed to get so concerned with Europe's opinion about our military conduct, anyway? Where's this vaunted Continental sophistication by which some aspire to be admired?

(PS- The next radio story was a panel about how China is modernizing gradually, letting capitalist institutions take the soil and then rooting them out when results are inconvenient. And the interviewer asked "Well, that's how it's done by most governments, isn't it?" The fact that most governments suck garden hose seems to have escaped his attention, but he's content to play the numbers game: When the shit hits the fan, he wants to be with the center of humanity.

The United States remains the most revolutionary force for good the world has ever seen. This may well be the beginning of the decadent phase of our global power, but it's still the only casino in town. So pour me a fresh drink and take that blouse down a couple more buttons, honey... And tip the busboy, he's doing sensational work.)

"Black sheep" my ass.

Word. Great stuff, guys.

"I wonder why the West has lost much of its sense of self preservation."

--Woman Drops Bid On Bin Laden Name Change--

APPLETON, Wis. - A woman who petitioned to change her last name to bin Laden did not appear in court on Friday and her case was dismissed....

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071013/ap_on_fe_st/odd_ms__bin_laden;_ylt=AleNySAM5N8q2FFXmEWb..4Z.3QA

Too many people take the enormous comfort and privilege we live in for granted.

Dear Congress:

Extending SCHIP to families making three times the poverty limit? Not a good use of my tax dollars.

Creating new centers named after congresscritters to study just how bees manage to fly? Not a good use of my tax dollars.

Protecting people who have fled oppression and now face constant threats to their lives solely for speaking out in defense of Western civilization? A good use of my tax dollars.

'Course, being a good capitalist, I would hope that various shadowy government acronyms would use this as an opportunity to smoke out violent terrorist cells in the U.S., but we can discuss that later.

Wow. And to Crid's comment. Wow again.

I wish I could say "unbelievable." But it's all too believable.

Nailed it, Crid.

Creating new centers named after congresscritters to study just how bees manage to fly? Not a good use of my tax dollars.

To which do you object: the naming after congresscritters or the funding of scientific institutions? Or both?

I would submit that one of the major engines of American success is that we are behind most of the major technical innovations in the world. The money the government spends funding research ends up paying for itself and a whole lot more. E.g., how's that whole internet thingy working out for people?

Actually, we're way behind in science, and sometimes research that may seem to not have much value in and of itself is a needed bridge that leads to other discoveries.

I'm shocked, SHOCKED, that legions of moderate, peace-loving Muslims aren't rushing to protect and provide sanctuary for Ms. Ali at their local Mosque.

Yeah, but....The internet is an outgrowth of a defense department enterprise, but nobody, absolutely zero people, foresaw that it would be turned into the intellectual and commercial enterprise that it is, or they'd be rich and famous. All the little trinkets hanging off of it that make it so valuable to us --browsers, file standards, all the software-- came to us from developers who were chasing a buck. Let's say you drove drove to your girlfriend's place and got laid this weekend... How much gratitude should you really feel towards the Interstate Highway System?

You're not wrong about this, but we should resist the kind of thinking that says Government is the Original Source of Good Things. I'm touchy about this today because Al Gore's new trophy caused Reason to reprint a classic from Postrel:

http://www.reason.com/news/show/31005.html

Right within our borders, representing "The Religion of Peace," here's a Pennsylvania imam, Fouad ElBayly, president of the Johnstown Islamic Center, who says Ayan Hirsi Ali must be put to death:

http://hotair.com/archives/2007/04/22/pittsburgh-muslim-cleric-ayaan-hirsi-ali-must-die/

“She has been identified as one who has defamed the faith. If you come into the faith, you must abide by the laws, and when you decide to defame it deliberately, the sentence is death,” said ElBayly, who came to the U.S. from Egypt in 1976.

I don't know about you, but while that isn't a direct call to murder her in so many words...the barbarian fuck has to know that some Muslims will hear his words and feel they're being commanded to kill her in the name of their primitive religion.

Holy shit, I echo jerry on that. Especially as I am occasionally (affectionately) described as a black sheep by the sibs.

Amy -

No doubt that is exactly why the fucker said it. To think that this asshole has been here, in this country, as long as I have (been alive) and can bring himself to say that, makes me ill. Fucking loony morons.

You're not wrong about this, but we should resist the kind of thinking that says Government is the Original Source of Good Things.

Exactly. I think the government does a pretty good job of occupying the research space effectively, paying mostly for stuff that's too far removed from being a money maker for most companies to care about, but distributing findings widely so that the private sphere can take new information and technologies and run with them.

Actually, we're way behind in science,

In what sense? Most of the major research centers in the world are here, as are most of the truly innovative companies. True, our science education is subpar through high school, but our universities are pretty much the best in the world.

To which do you object: the naming after congresscritters or the funding of scientific institutions? Or both?

Apologies, everyone, I was trying to come up with an example of blatant pork and wasn't quite outrageous enough. How about this:

Creating new centers named after Congresscritters to figure out if people like chocolate better than brussel sprouts? Not a good use of my tax dollars.

I am all for funding legitimate scientific inquiries, but I think we can all agree that not all projects proposed by Congressional reps fall under that heading, eh?

> government does a pretty
> good job of occupying
> the research space

No no no! No! Listen, there's no chart of decimal numbers on a 16 x 5 matrix that I can show you to prove this, but it's just not the case that government is the source of the best innovation through research. Of course it isn't. If your average technocrat was actually good for something and could smell the future, he'd be in the private sector. Don't you think Al Gore would have become Sergey Brin if he could have?

Let's say you're a bright young doctor. You have a brilliant idea! Someday, maybe it perhaps could possibly --following years or decades of expensive investigation, refinement and contingent support from unforeseen discoveries in distant fields of inquiry-- turn into something big. So whaddya do?

First you call your sister and brother-in-law, because he's doing pretty well in the lawn furniture business and might have some cash he needs to park for awhile. If they're not interested, you go to venture capital types. If they're not interested either, you go back to the University and start sniffing around, and maybe ask Lena for some help composing a grant proposal.

But there's nothing special about your desperation that makes your idea any good. When I was a kid, there was always a moment for the Hollywood protagonist where his friend finally came around: "Y'know Justin, it's so crazy, it just might work!" Academe is not nearly so enthused about long shots, nor are the taxpayers whose money is forcibly collected for distribution.

Worst of all is when an Al Gore types glow in the illumination from the toiling academics who are spending public money. Nothing is more repugnant in the American mind as the presumption that elected officials have special judgment.

Of course, of course government has a role to play in some corners of research. But you do our society a grave dishonor by believing the spark comes from centralized thinkers.

For the best thinking about this, see: http://urltea.com/1qy5

Amy politely asked once who'd be at my Dream Dinner Party, and Virginia certainly would be. She recognizes the importance of lawful contexts and enforceable contracts in making the American Miracle work. I literally keep copies around the house for friends. Let me know if you want one.

Don't you think Al Gore would have become Sergey Brin if he could have?

Those who can't Brin should do everything in their power to smooth the path for the Brins of the world.

And you're absolutely right about Virginia.

But you do our society a grave dishonor by believing the spark comes from centralized thinkers.

Maybe I'm not being clear, then, because that's exactly what I'm not saying.

I'm saying that one reason why the U.S. tends to be a place of innovation is that we have a system where the various government bodies (NIH, DARPA, etc.) have set up a wickedly competitive system (for the grant I've got from NIMH, they funded about 10% or so of applicants) where they get some of the smartest people around to compete for money to do weird science projects that may or may not yield anything. If those results yield something that can be monetized, the private sector does a great job of doing really cool and amazing things with it. However, it's not an accident that PageRank (Google's algorithm) was developed by researchers at Stanford (which also holds the patent). Or that the guys who just won the Nobel in physics for figuring out some property of magnetism that makes it easy to store more information on hard disks were working at MIT. The basic research that drives many technology advances is developed in big universities, often as a result of projects the government funded, because no private company would fund them at the time - stock holders want stuff that will affect balance sheets for the next quarter. When I wrote that government does a good job in research, what I meant was that it did a good job of seeding lots of worthy projects (and of course some stupid ones, too, but it can be hard to know that when these things are funded).

I've got the Ph.D. from a top school, and the publications in good journals and etc. I chose to go into business instead of academia for many reasons. I fully agree that the private sector produces the most innovations. But I'm also convinced that the government's funding of basic research - because it doesn't require that projects be money makers right away - provides the private sector with things it is less likely to produce itself.

Let me know if you want one.

I've never heard of that book before. It's that good?

> provides the private sector
> with things it is less
> likely to produce itself.

Sure, and Postrel gives credit where due, and never argues that an unfettered market --red in tooth and claw-- could get the job done alone.

Email to cridcrid at g mail dot com and I'll send a book.

Wiki says "The name PageRank is a trademark of Google. The PageRank process has been patented (U.S. Patent 6,285,999 ). The patent is not assigned to Google but to Stanford University." So one wonders how the money gets divvied. With a penny from each 1000 searches, Stanford could still do pretty well. It also says PageRank was named for Larry, which I didn't know.

So anyway, when you see atrocities like that being published this deeply into the 21st century, and then you see fuckups like the handling of Hirsi Ali, you might find yourself wondering: Why exactly were we supposed to get so concerned with Europe's opinion about our military conduct, anyway? Where's this vaunted Continental sophistication by which some aspire to be admired?

I understand, Crid, your irritation with European opinion in general and with the disgusting nature of the Swiss "atrocity" in particular.

Switzerland is not, however, a full member of the EC.

The country is peculiar - geographically - in this regard and its citizens' disinclination to embrace full membership - except as a future option - is generally thought typical of their pointedly isolationist attitudes.

> not, however, a full
> member of the EC.

Never said they were, only that they were Europeans.

And I wasn't trying to make fun of the European obsession with centralized authority, but I've done so here in the past and would be happy to go a few rounds, if anybody's into it. It's part of the problem.

Euro-bashing!?! Sweet.

In spite of my desire for and belief in some form of social medicine (please, no rotten tomatoes), there is a lot to criticize. Some of it even related to socialized medicine, badly done.

But my biggest issue is freedom of speech, nearly every form of expression. Locking people up or censuring them, because they're nasty, hateful prigs, is not only a bad idea from a pure speech perspective. It is also very dangerous. Has a way of forcing the hateful underground, where they're more likely to resort to terror. It also has a tendency to make people wonder whether there might not be something to the ideas that are illegal to express. Thus lending support through martyrdom, to the aforementioned underground movements.

Instead, we should be actively encouraging the hateful to speak their minds. The better to respond to it, out in the open for everyone to hear. Also the better to know who they are and where they are. Let them be loud and proud, the better to hammer their bullshit into the ground. A perfect example, is Mr.ElBayly. In some countries, it would be illegal for him to actually say that, here we can and do, respond to that kind of vile garbage. It also helps to drive home the point that Ms. Hirsi Ali, is actually in significant danger.

The other issue I tend to have, is this pervasive notion that those on the dole, should lead some sort of idyllic existence. I am all for welfare, but it shouldn't be something that actively discourages people from actually doing something to rise above it. It's bad enough here in the U.s. In many Euro nations, it is far better for someone on the dole to stay on, than it is for them to actually get a low paying job and try to work up out of it. Welfare should be very basic sustenance only, no frills, nothing fancy or attractive about it.

On the other hand, many Euro nations allow gays to marry, are far more secular, have better primary education and tend to be far more polite, than us uncouth Americans. (Yes, I am fully aware of the irony of an asshole like me saying that Crid.)

So now it's good to be polite? I thought polite was BORING! (sorry, just a sensitive Canuck blowing off steam)

"So now it's good to be polite? I thought polite was BORING!"

Don't worry, Chrissy!

The countries in Europe are seldom polite about each other!

I expect half of them are delighted that the Swiss look like foil-wrapped shits for the moment - it takes the heat off the dodgy immigration statements of many other [full] member states.

Brutally boring, which is why I'm an asshole, arrogant American.

Like your apology. Perfect example of that Canadian kindness. . .Here, your trying to blow off steam, obviously annoyed, yet you apologize. The really American, rude thing to do, would have been to say;

So now it's good to be polite? I thought polite was BORING! Well isn't that a fine ol' fuck you too!!

Of course if you were an American, you wouldn't have been annoyed and the whole discussion dissolves in a poof of logic. Never happened, never existed. I love paradox.

Seriously though, I really do appreciate those who are polite. Indeed, I am usually rather polite myself, excepting when I get really irritated. Even then, I am not prone to the excess that many can get to. I also love Canuks. Gave me Neil Young. Gave me a lot of interesting Yooper friends, who swear they're Canadians. Gave me legal booze within hours of my MI home. And you're not assholes like me. What's not to love?

> than us uncouth Americans.

Speak for yourself, trailer-girl. I'm the quintessence of elevated couth and elegance...

On the other hand, there's more important things in life than bein' pretty

Crid -

That really depends on how one defines "couth and elegance." Quintessence, thou art not. I've never seen you in an evening gown, so I really can't judge the elegant part.

Well, at this rate, by 2010 I'll have enough rack to fill a generous halter. Middle age sux.