Friday, January 31, 2020

A man of a fierce and fiery countenance

My 7th great uncle was Aaron Pinney and along with four of his brothers, all served in the American Revolution, as did the majority of the men of their town, Simsbury, Connecticut. In doing genealogical research you become accustomed to dry records - muster rolls, births, deaths, land purchases, etc. You know there are real people behind the records but it is sometimes to make them out.

Aaron served as a sergeant during the war but this was not his first taste of war. During the French and Indian wars of the 1750s, he had enlisted as a drummer at the age of 16 and already seen battle. The facts are there, but little of the experience. Until I came across this account in People's War: Original Voices of the American Revolution by Noel Rae. Wonderful evocation of the mustering of men in a small rural Connecticut town during the Lexington Alarm. Sergeant Aaron Pinney was part of this muster as was his older brother Lieutenant Abraham Pinner and his younger brother Corporal Abner Pinney. Literally, brothers in arms.
Another clergyman (though not yet ordained) who answered the call of God and his country was Daniel Barber of Simsbury, Connecticut, a town that had long been under God's special Providence. On the eve of the Indian uprising known as King Philip's War, a miraculous warning shot from an unknown source had been heard within a radius of fifty miles, sounding the alarm and saving many Protestant lives; and when, in 1768, hailstones "full the bulk of goose-eggs" fell on the town, the damage, according to a report in the local newspaper, was much less than it would have been "had not the hail fell considerably perpendicular." In his memoirs Daniel Barber recalled how on hearing the news of Bunker Hill he had joined the Simsbury militia signing up for five months. His captain was Elihu Humphrey, "a well-bred gentleman" whose "sweetness of disposition secured him the love of all good men"; his lieutenant was Andrew Hilyer, "a handsome sprightly young gentleman"; his three sergeants were Aaron Pinney, "a man of a fierce and fiery countenance"; Jacob Tuller, whose "brow was generally knit together in a forbidding frown"; and Daniel Higley, "who had been a soldier in the old French war, was of a musical turn, and his old war songs made the time pass away to very good account." The Rev. Mr. Pitkin preached a farewell sermon on the text "Play the man for your country, and for the cities of your God; and the Lord do that which seemeth him good," which was well received. "It was tender and pathetic, lively and animating. It was like martial music; while it touched the finer feelings, it roused and animated for the dreadful onset—the shout of war and the cry of victory! During the time of its delivery, abundance of tears were seen to flow, from both old and young, male as well as female.)

After the service, the soldiers mingled with their families and sweethearts,
exchanging, as for the last time, the token of their love and the best affections of the heart. In the midst of this mingling scene of sorrow, the drums beat to arms. "Soldiers, take your places!" is the word; the line of march is formed; we add one more wishful, lingering look, while many a silent tear bespeaks the real feeling of the heart.

The word is given. We begin our march with silence, downcast looks, and pensive feelings and reflections. We were now leaving our homes, our friends, and all our pleasant places behind, and which our eyes might never again behold. The most of us had not, at that time, I believe, been twenty miles from home.

After marching awhile, we began to give way to more cheerful and lively feelings. We marched about eight miles that afternoon; at night put up at James Marsh's inn. Here, for the first time, I slept as a soldier on the floor, with a cartridge box for my pillow. At that period, horse wagons being very little in use, an ox team was provided to carry our provision for the way, and a barrel of rum. Our provision was salt pork and peas. Wherever we stopped, a large kettle was hung over the fire, in which the salt meat was put without freshening, and the dry peas without soaking. Cooks and stewards were appointed who took charge of the table department. When all was ready, a stroke on the drum was the signal to begin to eat; and we were generally hungry enough to stand in need of no great urging. While passing through Connecticut, the females were very polite in lending us knives and forks; but, after entering Massachusetts, we were not allowed the like favor, without pledging money or some other kind of security—the people saying that they had lost many of their spoons by the soldiers who had gone before us. Our bread was hard bisquit, in which there was a small quantity of lime, just sufficient to make the mouth sore. They were so hard that the soldiers called them candlestick bottoms.

Now for the first time we traveled on the Lord's day, under arms, and past meeting houses in the time of public worship, with drums and fifes playing martial music; all which was calculated to afford to a New England man some doubts and reflections whether God would be as well pleased with such parade and military performance as if we had stayed home to read our Bibles, or went to meeting to hear the minister. But military discipline and the habits of a soldier soon effected a degree of relaxation in most of us.

After about nine or ten days' marching in company, with our ox team loaded with our salt pork, peas, and candlestick bottoms for bread, and the barrel of rum to cheer our spirits and wash our feet, which began to be very sore by traveling, we came to Roxbury, the place of our destination. There the place of our encampment was already marked out, and a part of our regiment on the spot. For every six soldiers there was a tent provided. The ground it covered was about six or seven feet square. This served for kitchen, parlor, and hall. The green turf, covered with a blanket, was our bed and bedstead. When we turned in for the night, we had to lie perfectly straight, like candles in a box; this was not pleasant to our hip bones and knee joints, which often in the night would wake us, and beg to turn over. Our household utensils, altogether, were an iron pot, a canteen, or wooden bottle holding two quarts, a pail, and a wooden bowl. Each had to do his own washing, and take his turn at the cookery.

The Best of the Bee



All hope and little reality

From the excellent Perilous Fight by Stephen Budiansky, an account of the naval aspects of the War of 1812. Page 33.
Travel was arduous, erratic, and unbelievably expensive; even in settled New England, stage coaches crept along barely travelable roads at an average pace of four miles an hour, taking three days from Boston to New York, two days from New York to Philadelphia. From Baltimore to Washington—where the new federal city, all hope and little reality, was rising on a malarial backwater with nothing to show yet but a single row of brick houses, a few log cabins, the half-finished White House, and, a mile and a half away across a bramble-tangled swamp, the two wings of the Capitol still unconnected by a center—there was a stagecoach but no road at all; the driver chose among meandering tracks in the woods and hoped for the best. To go from Baltimore to New York cost $21, a month’s average wages.
Or roughly $4,250 in today's money.

Off Beat Humor


Click to enlarge.

And then there is English humor

Heh.

Click to enlarge.

Data Talks




I see wonderful things




Winter Scene, Stockholm, 1899 by Alfred Bergström

Winter Scene, Stockholm, 1899 by Alfred Bergström

Click to enlarge.

Sociologies uncomfortable relationship with robust metrics, measurements, data, and predictions


Yesterday I saw a series of tweets from a researcher Zach Goldberg posted some data that seemed to be significant about a significant topic in the field of psychology.

It looked intriguing but I really could not make sense of what measures were being used and what the data was supposed to be telling me.

In the field of psychology measures are often two or three phase shifts of indirectness away from direct measure of real phenomenon. By which I mean there are relatively direct measures of reality. How fast is John Smith running - start line, finish line, stop watch. You have a fairly useful measure of reality. How happy is John Smith - That one is more difficult. What is happy versus content versus serene? What is condition versus perception. Is happiness a context dependent phenomenon or a personality trait? And whatever we define it to be, how do we measure it? Brainwaves? Self-Reports? Blood flow? Serotonin levels? Beta waves? Or something even more indirect? Number of people who want to spend time with the target? Volume of laughter? etc.

So when I saw a complex measurement system that was likely one or two phase shifts away from direct measure, I abandoned consideration of the tweet. I figured that if there was a real there there, someone would eventually intervene and translate.

And now they have. Lee Jussim has brought sense to the incomprehensible representation of measures and data. There is still the issue of indirectness of measurement but that is fundamental to the field. Here is Jussim explanation of what is being represented.

That is helpful.

Are the findings of the research real and useful? TBD. I think the value here is more as an example of our frequent overestimation of the pertinence of data. Too often we impute reality, accuracy and precision to information in the form of data simply because it is data. It is hard to keep in mind all the discounting caveats behind the data in order to arrive at a suitably weighted estimation as to whether the data is actually telling us something that is usefully true.

In order to spare reading the tweet stream what this data suggests is that the ideological conviction that there is institutional racism everywhere is at least wrong. Or at least questionable.

My take on the matter is that the claim is badly framed. Everyone carries a population of stereotypes, tropes and heuristics, which are rarely uniformly true but are frequently usefully true. Racism, sexism, xenophobia, etc. are rarely conditions in and of themselves. The problem is not with the stereotypes, tropes and heuristics. The problem is when people refuse to update those stereotypes, tropes and heuristics when counter-evidence is presented. That then becomes bigotry. And malicious bigotry takes infinite forms, not just race, gender, xenophobia, etc.

Goldberg's data is consistent with that view. He finds that Racial Resentment (a form of measured racism) is only weakly correlated with warmth scale. If there is racism, then Racial Resentment ought to be pretty strongly negatively correlated with the warmth or coldness of feeling towards the target group. If you have a high Racial Resentment towards them, then you also ought to feel pretty cool towards them.

Goldberg's data suggests that there is little correlation between RR and feelings towards black men. The degree of measured Racial Resentment does not predict how warmly or coldly you feel towards black men.

There is a weak negative correlation for black women. Degree of Racial Resentment does provide a weak prediction for decreased warmth.

Maybe the measures are simply not good reflections of reality but this is a surprising result and suggests that the current measures of Racial Resentment are not actually capturing actual racial resentment, or that there is no link between Racial Resentment and manifested behavior. Both are possible.

As an example of the latter, I know plenty of people who are philosophically opposed towards open borders immigration who also have extensive networks of warm relations with both foreigners and fellow Americans of different cultural backgrounds. That would be a case where imputed Xenophobic Resentment is not correlated with warmth towards foreigners, or is correlated in the opposite direction anticipated. That isn't uncommon. Opposition to immigration can be construed as xenophobia but it can also originate on perfectly valid economic, sociological, and philosophical grounds as well.

But Goldberg's data throws up something else which is as perplexing. From Jussim:
The only groups to which people are openly negative (Thermomometer scores<50, y-axis) are White men and women; and the only people hostile to them? Are those with the LEAST "anti-black racial resentment" (low scores on x-axis). Claiming on qaires variations of "yeah, blacks are massively oppressed and are not responsible for their lives and have gotten an unfair shake" does not predict warmth towards blacks as much as it does hostility towards whites, especially rich ones. [snip] But Zach's discovery that the most powerful thing RR scores seem to predict with respect to feeling thermometers is *attitudes towards to rich whites* wherein LOW RR scores correspond to hostility to rich whites, is a douzy.

Low racial resentment scores do not predict low warmth towards blacks. But low racial resentment scores do predict high antipathy towards whites is a stark surprise.

It is perfectly consistent with the positions of much of the hard postmodernist intersectionalist left where a love of diversity is highly correlated with antipathy towards whites and Asian-Americans is a common condition.

Goldberg's data is interesting but it is just one more step towards improving actual understanding. The measures are too indirect and unreliable and the whole field is ideologically motivated. But his data does serve to profile just how weak our measurement systems are and the need for a much stronger philosophical and empirical foundation.

Thursday, January 30, 2020

We've Only Just Begin by the Carpenters

We've Only Just Begin by the Carpenters


Double click to enlarge.

We've Only Just Begin
by the Carpenters

We've only just begun to live
White lace and promises
A kiss for luck and we're on our way
(We've only begun)

Before the risin' sun, we fly
So many roads to choose
We'll start out walkin' and learn to run
(And yes, we've just begun)

Sharing horizons that are new to us
Watching the signs along the way
Talkin' it over, just the two of us
Workin' together day to day
Together

And when the evening comes, we smile
So much of life ahead
We'll find a place where there's room to grow
(And yes, we've just begun)

Sharing horizons that are new to us
Watching the signs along the way
Talkin' it over, just the two of us
Workin' together day to day
Together
Together

And when the evening comes, we smile
So much of life ahead
We'll find a place where there's room to grow
And yes, we've just begun

The still-unpaid cost of the war against Britain, a debt of $82 million, pressed like a dead weight on the national economy

From the excellent Perilous Fight by Stephen Budiansky, an account of the naval aspects of the War of 1812. Page 33.
The reality was that America in the first decade of the new century was poor, weak, and backward. By many measures there had been little progress from colonial days. Compared with London, with its one million people, America’s great cities were little more than overgrown medieval villages. Boston had actually lost population for several years following the Revolution; by 1800 its population stood at 25,000, little more than what it had been thirty years earlier. New York had 60,000, Baltimore 13,000, Charleston 18,000. With the possible sole exception of Philadelphia—whose 70,000 residents enjoyed neatly laid-out blocks, streetlights, drains, and wooden pipes that brought in fresh water—they also had no sanitation to speak of, bad paving, an abundance of dramshops, and periodic outbreaks of yellow fever and other deadly epidemics that sent the residents fleeing for the hills. The still-unpaid cost of the war against Britain, a debt of $82 million, pressed like a dead weight on the national economy; the entire capitalization of all the banks in the country amounted to but a third as much.

Off Beat Humor


Click to enlarge.

Data Talks




I see wonderful things




Venice, 1874 by Ivan Aivazovsky

Venice, 1874 by Ivan Aivazovsky

Click to enlarge.

Manufacturing bad guys for the media narrative

Interesting follow-up. A week or two ago, there was a Second Amendment rally in Virginia protesting the new legislation against gun ownership. The rally was well anticipated by the mainstream media with speculation that there was likely to be confrontations and violence incited by white supremacists or white nationalists.

In the event, the rally was racially and ideologically diverse, there was no violence, there were no confrontations. A big bust from the MSM perspective, but good for everyone else.

From the MSM perspective, the saving grace was the arrest by the FBI of some white nationalist terrorists in the process of planning an attack.

This seemed suspect timing. There just aren't that many white nationalists and they tend to be closely monitored. How did they get through the monitoring net to plan this incident?

This felt like the hapless Coptic film producer and his convenient video which no one had seen, suddenly becoming the establishment patsy to blame for the Benghazi attack. It was all nonsense of course. Yes, the trailer existed but it was not the catalyst for the embassy attack by terrorists and was known not to be the catalyst. It was all a show to distract from the fact that the Ambassador had been calling for greater security, that ISIS terrorists had planned and executed the attack, and we left four Americans to their deaths for fear of escalation.

At the time it took 2-4 weeks before it became clear that the Coptic film producer was simply a deliberate distraction.

It felt very similar in the Virginia case. Lots of hysteria and at the last moment when there was no violence, snatching MSM victory from defeat by pulling a white nationalist terrorist group from the hat. All the big media outlets covered the arrests and then it immediately went radio silent. No follow-up, no elaboration. Just a convenient cover story.

As it now turns out because there was never a cover story in the first place. The three targets were under active surveillance. They never planned an attack. They planned to be in place to follow-up on a race war if one occurred.

Being stupid and racist are not a crime. You have to have a criminal act or transparent premeditation.

This appears to have been little more than a malcontented farce.

From Were White Nationalists Really Planning To Attack The Virginia Gun Rights Rally? According To Police Records, Not Exactly by Anders Hagstrom. As far as I am aware, none of the MSM outlets have addressed the reality of the FBI arrests.

Wednesday, January 29, 2020

America’s third president was much given to “speculative doctrines on imaginary perfection” that did not always comport with reality.

From the excellent Perilous Fight by Stephen Budiansky, an account of the naval aspects of the War of 1812. Page 32.
Like all caricatures, the picture of America painted by British travelers and opinion writers captured some truths. On a visit to Monticello during the summer of 1805, Augustus Foster observed with more perception and nuance, and less of the automatic disdain that had animated his earlier impressions of America, the contradictions of American democracy, and of the leader who was supposed to embody its values. The president who made a show of democratic simplicity, riding his horse unaccompanied about Washington in his worn coat, spent freely on his own comforts at home atop his mountain retreat in Virginia. There were all the gadgets Jefferson’s guests were expected to admire: the cart equipped with an odometer, the spiral rotating clothes rack. And then Foster, the English aristocrat, found that his own views on human equality and liberty were far more broad-minded than Jefferson’s, at least when it came to extending the American notion of liberty to the black race. Foster thought it self-evident that blacks were “as capable to the full of profiting by the advantages of Education as any other of any Shade whatever,” but the Republican president told him that “the Mental Qualities of the Negro Race” fitted them only “to carry Burthens” and that freedom would only render them more miserable; the American champion of democratic equality dismissed emancipation of the slaves as “an English Hobby,” much as the tea tax had been. And Jefferson the extoller of agrarian virtue was “considered a very bad Farmer,” Foster found in conversation with others nearby; a whole hillside of Monticello had been so negligently cultivated as to have eroded away into gullies so deep that “Houses afterwards might be buried” in them. “They have been obliged to scatter Scotch Broom Seed over it, which at least succeeded in at least hiding the Cavities.” Like the country itself, America’s third president was much given to “speculative doctrines on imaginary perfection” that did not always comport with reality.

Off Beat Humor


Click to enlarge.

It was possible to join societies that would guarantee to send a member to one’s burial to listen for signs and sounds of vitality

Cleaning up a corner of my library, moving stacks of books around, I come across Citizens A Chronicle of the French Revolution by Simon Schama which I pulled out to read sometime this past year and still have not done so.

As is my wont, a book can't really pass through my hands without at least a cursory glance at the text. My eye falls on the following paragraph:
The 1780s were the great age of prison literature. Hardly a year went by without another contribution to the genre, usually bearing the title The Bastille Revealed (La Bastille Dévoilée) or some variation. It used the standard Gothic devices of provoking shudders of disgust and fear together with pulse-accelerating moments of hope. In particular, as Monique Cottret has pointed out, it drew on the fashionable terror of being buried alive. This was such a preoccupation in the late eighteenth century (and not only in France) that it was possible to join societies that would guarantee to send a member to one’s burial to listen for signs and sounds of vitality and to insure against one of these living entombments.

In what was by far the greatest and deservedly the most popular of all the anti-Bastille books, Linguet’s Memoirs of the Bastille, the prison was depicted as just such a living tomb. In some of its most powerful passages Linguet represented captivity as a death, all the worse for the officially extinguished person being fully conscious of his own obliteration.

Linguet’s memoir burned with the heat of personal betrayal. He had, he said, been lured back to France in 1780 from England, where he had been publishing his Annales Politiques, on the express understanding that he would, in effect, be immune from prosecution. Almost as soon as he returned, he was whisked off to the Bastille because of his attack on the Maréchal Duras. His account of the physical conditions he endured is far more harrowing than anything experienced by Morellet, Marmontel or de Sade and is not altogether borne out by the Bastille archives. But there is no reason to assume he lied when he wrote of “two mattresses eaten by worms; a cane chair of which the seat had but a few strings holding it together, a folding table… two china pots, one to drink from, and two paving stones to hold a fire.” (Some time later the warders brought him some fire irons and tongs – though not, he complained, brass dogs.) His worst moments came when the eggs of mites and moths hatched out and all his bed and personal linen was transformed into “clouds of butterflies.
I have just finished an account of the War of 1812 as well as a couple of books on the American Revolution.

One of the striking things was the inhumanity and appalling conditions of prisoners imprisoned for the duration of the war. The British prison hulks were perhaps the worst but closely rivaled by the somewhat different barbarism of Dartmoor in England. If I recall correctly, more Americans died of privation and disease in British prison hulks and prisons than died on the battlefield of the war.

1750-1775 was the dawning of the Age of Enlightenment so it is not especially surprising to see a manifested interest in prison reform in 1780. What is astonishing is how relatively little progress any of the developed nations have made in the intervening nearly quarter millennia (240 years).

Lot's of ideas and yet little progress. It took forever just to get to halfway humane physical conditions. In terms of reform and reintegration, it seems like there has been hardly in progress for all the thinking, writing, proposing, and experimental implementations.

Data Talks




I see wonderful things




Demonstrable bigotry

It seems significant that both these demonstrations of arrogant, condescending bigotry by representatives of the establishments (in Britain and the US) against the voters of their respective countries are coming out at this moment (failing impeachment and failed remain campaign).

Probably just the law of large numbers and coincidental timing but hard not to make an inference that the arrogant, condescending bigotry is indeed the default setting of the Mandarin Class on both sides of the Atlantic.

Notable that in both instances the demonstrable bigots are big names in the mainstream media.

From the Remain Mandarin Class in Britain:


From the pro-impeachment Mandarin Class in the US (about the 3 minute mark):


Double click to enlarge.

Best of the Bee




Unknown title by David Tutwiler

Unknown title by David Tutwiler

Click to enlarge.

Not born yesterday

I am looking forward to this, Not Born Yesterday: The Science of Who We Trust and What We Believe by Hugo Mercier.

The last twenty, maybe thirty years has seen a barrage of stories and research about the failure of the human epistemic system. We are unreliable witnesses, we are not logical, we are not open to new data, we are biased, we are subjective, we are overconfident in our own capabilities, we lack self-control, etc. While all true to some degree in some instances, there is kind of a problem with this line of argument if you have any confidence in darwinian evolution.

Whatever is going on in the grey matter, it clearly is effective, perhaps even optimally effective. There are more people living better lives than at any point in human history. We may not be perfect thinkers but something is working.

While there are elements of truth in much of the above criticism there are a couple of errors in the analysis.

While the criticisms always encompass some valid issue, the extent and consequence of the problem are almost always overstated. In many instances, subsequent research reveals that the analysis itself was wrong in the first place.

Perhaps the biggest flaw in the massive industry of proving human thinking fallibility is that elements are examined in isolation and without context. If people operate with some simple heuristic which has a high error rate, the issue is not that there is an error rate. The issue is whether there is a better heuristic with a lower error rate.

We encounter all sorts of people and never have enough time to really get to know them well enough to make the types of judgments we need to make in the short time-frames we have. All decision-making entails expenditure of time and energy and we never have enough time and never enough energy in an immensely complex world with inherent uncertainty to make the very best decisions possible. Instead, we find heuristics and cognitive shortcuts which are on balance economically beneficial.

When we rely on heuristics, we are playing the odds. We won't get every decision right but we may get them mostly right given the time and energy constraints within which we operate.

A made up example. Say I operate with the heuristic that I should place more confidence in tall people. It will be easy to demonstrate that this is an unreliable heuristic. There will be plenty of instances where trusting a particular tall person is a bad idea. But given that it seems true that tall people disproportionately end up in leadership positions, perhaps over multiple instances and over time, in aggregate, having confidence in tall people might be an efficient heuristic even though it is not a uniformly accurate one.

The question is not whether placing confidence in tall people is a uniformly and completely accurate strategy. The question is whether there is a superior heuristic that yields better results.

Most research seeks lab room perfection - i.e. they examine human cognition against a benchmark of perfection. In the real world of constraints, the benchmark is not perfection but optimization. What habits yield the greatest long run benefit at the lowest short term cost.

My aversion for the conventional academic narrative about the flaws of human epistemology goes beyond the test of demonstrated evolutionary fitness.

Too often, it appears to me that much of the narrative of flawed human epistemology is a means towards an ends. Very bright people (only some of whom are accomplished) trying to demonstrate why we would be all better off by leaving the hard decision-making to our cognitive betters. This implicit assumption is part of my aversion to Nudge by Cass Sunstein. It presumes, despite their record of failure, that centralized decision-making by experts is superior to dispersed decision-making by all citizens. And using evidence of epistemic shortcomings to justify that centralization of decision-making.

Give me Darwin (evolution) and Ferguson (emergent order) over Marx (centralized decision-making by the vanguard).

Looks like Mercier may be making the arguments I so rarely see made. The optimally effective decision-making under time and resources constraints of course looks radically different from perfect decision-making without any time and resource constraints.

From the blurb:
Why people are not as gullible as we think

Not Born Yesterday explains how we decide who we can trust and what we should believe--and argues that we're pretty good at making these decisions. In this lively and provocative book, Hugo Mercier demonstrates how virtually all attempts at mass persuasion--whether by religious leaders, politicians, or advertisers--fail miserably. Drawing on recent findings from political science and other fields ranging from history to anthropology, Mercier shows that the narrative of widespread gullibility, in which a credulous public is easily misled by demagogues and charlatans, is simply wrong.

Why is mass persuasion so difficult? Mercier uses the latest findings from experimental psychology to show how each of us is endowed with sophisticated cognitive mechanisms of open vigilance. Computing a variety of cues, these mechanisms enable us to be on guard against harmful beliefs, while being open enough to change our minds when presented with the right evidence. Even failures--when we accept false confessions, spread wild rumors, or fall for quack medicine--are better explained as bugs in otherwise well-functioning cognitive mechanisms than as symptoms of general gullibility.

UPDATE: Not two hours after I posted this, the perfect example of tactically optimal heuristic decision-making under uncertainty and constraints pops up on Twitter.



Tuesday, January 28, 2020

Send in the Clowns sung by Judie Collins

Send in the Clowns sung by Judie Collins


Double click to enlarge.
Send in the Clowns
by Judie Collins

Isn't it rich?
Are we a pair?
Me here at last on the ground,
You in mid-air,
Where are the clowns?

Isn't it bliss?
Don't you approve?
One who keeps tearing around,
One who can't move,
Where are the clowns?
There ought to be clowns?

Just when I'd stopped opening doors,
Finally knowing the one that I wanted was yours
Making my entrance again with my usual flair
Sure of my lines
No one is there

Don't you love farce?
My fault, I fear
I thought that you'd want what I want
Sorry, my dear!
But where are the clowns
Send in the clowns
Don't bother, they're here

Isn't it rich?
Isn't it queer?
Losing my timing this late in my career
But where are the clowns?
There ought to be clowns
Well, maybe next year

Expert opinion down the ages

From the excellent Perilous Fight by Stephen Budiansky, an account of the naval aspects of the War of 1812. Page 32.
America’s grasping commercialism and braying talk of liberty, most Britons felt, were all of a piece with its upstart vulgarity. An honest recognition of America’s ongoing dependency on Britain for its very survival, economically and politically, ought to make Americans more grateful and less strident: more willing to accept the place Britain wished to assign her as a very junior partner; happy to behave, in other words, more as the colony they really, in fact, still were, not the excessively proud nation their upset victory at Yorktown had led them to declare themselves to be. “The Alps and Apennines of America are the British Navy,” asserted the Times of London. “If ever that should be removed, a short time will suffice to establish the head-quarters of a Duke-Marshal at Washington, and to divide the territory of the Union into military prefectures.” The even more jingoistic British newspaper the Courier chimed in with the observation that while America was arguably advantageous to Great Britain, Great Britain was necessary to America: “It is British capital, which directly or indirectly, sets half the industry of America in motion: it is the British fleets that give it protection and security.”

Off Beat Humor


Click to enlarge.

Data Talks




I see wonderful things




Insiders all the way down

I earlier posted Genealogy of the Mandarin Class, noting the marked tendency of families to symbiotically inhabit political, bureaucratic, academic and charitable institutions, making them inaccessible to ordinary citizens and creating an interlocking structure of interests inimical to the welfare of the commonweal. The earlier examples are at the bottom of this post.

The latest example is that of the Vindman twins. In the last gasps of the impeachment effort, there is a movement to hear from former security advisor Bolton. My suspicion, given his past testimonies, is that Bolton will turn out like the Mueller report - lots of heralded revelations ending up being a confirmation of Trumps argument.

Bolton has a book in the works and there is a campaign of leaks and teasers to keep the House Democrats salivating in anticipation of what could be revealed. My suspicion is their desperation blinds them to the distinction between could and will.

During the House impeachment hearings one of the witnesses was National Security Council aide Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman. His testimony was heralded but in the event turned out to be pretty much a dud. Worse than a dud in that it made him seem a petty institutional schemer with no real evidence to support his allegations and whose primary beef seemed to be that Trump's administration was ignoring his recommendations. All big institutions are rife with passed-over experts who complain about how ignorant leadership ignore the brilliance of their subordinates.

So who is responsible for reviewing Bolton's publicity campaign for Bolton's book to ensure that no national secrets get out? Alexander Vindman's identical twin brother, Yevgeny. From NSC aide handling book approvals is twin brother of Lt. Col. Vindman by Dave Boyer and S.A. Miller.
The twin brother of a key administration impeachment witness against President Trump is in charge of the National Security Council’s process for reviewing publications by current and former NSC officials, according to a new report on Monday.

Breitbart reported that Army Lt. Col. Yevgeny Vindman, a senior ethics lawyer for the NSC, is in charge of reviewing publications such as the book manuscript submitted to the NSC on Dec. 30 by former National Security Adviser John Bolton.

The report cited a source close to the administration. The NSC had no immediate comment.

Mr. Bolton allegedly has written that the president informed him that he was withholding military aid from Ukraine in return for an investigation of Democrat Joseph R. Biden, an accusation at the heart of the impeachment case.

Yevgeny Vindman is the identical twin brother of Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, one of Democrats’ main witnesses in the impeachment inquiry. Alexander Vindman testified that he told his brother about Mr. Trump’s July 25 call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in which Mr. Trump is accused of pressuring his counterpart for a Biden investigation.

Alexander Vindman told impeachment investigators that his sibling witnessed the decision to move the call’s transcript to a top-secret server.
So an impeachment shrouded in secrecy, notorious for strategic leaking, mishandling of secret documents, and general collusion between media and antagonistic deep state insiders is now reliant on the responsible separation of duties and integrity between two deep state insiders who happen to be twin brothers? Yeah. And Epstein did not kill himself.

I think Hanlon's Law
Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity
operates here. Pure coincidence and nothing ill-intended.

I am convinced that 95 times out of hundred, Hanlon's Law applies. But Washington sure makes it difficult to maintain that faith with all the incestuous insider interests.

Perhaps, for the integrity of our republic, there should be a rule to the effect that no family can have more than one member of the family in politics or in an institution closely aligned with government (academia, media, military, etc.) Probably unconstitutional and impractical, but there has to be some way to prevent this cascade of bad actors appearing to conspire against the will of the people as manifested through the electoral process.

Earlier examples of the incestuous intersection between power, money, and insider families.
Vice President Al Gore, son of Albert Gore Sr., a U.S. Representative who later served for 18 years as a U.S. Senator from Tennessee.

NPR Cokie Roberts, daughter of ambassador and long-time Democratic Congresswoman from Louisiana Lindy Boggs and of Hale Boggs, also a Democratic Congressman from Louisiana. He was Majority Leader of the House of Representatives and a member of the Warren Commission. He was lost on a plane which disappeared over Alaska on October 16, 1972. Her late sister, Barbara Boggs Sigmund, was mayor of Princeton, New Jersey, and a candidate for U.S. Senate from New Jersey. Her late brother Tommy Boggs was a prominent Washington, D.C., attorney and lobbyist.

NPR Legal Affairs Nina Totenberg, widow of U.S. Senator Floyd K. Haskell (D-Colorado). In March 2010, Totenberg's sister Amy Totenberg was nominated by President Barack Obama to the U.S. District Court in Atlanta.

Democratic House Leader and Representative of San Francisco, CaliforniaNancy Pelosi - When Nancy was born, her father was a Democratic Congressman from Maryland and he became Mayor of Baltimore seven years later. Pelosi's mother was also active in politics, organizing Democratic women and teaching her daughter the value of social networking. Pelosi's brother, Thomas D'Alesandro III, also a Democrat, was Mayor of Baltimore from 1967 to 1971.

President George Walker Bush, son of President George Herbert Walker Bush. Brother of Jeb Bush, 43rd Governor of Florida from 1999 to 2007.

Julian Castro, brother of United States Representative Joaquin Castro. Julian Castro was a member of the Obama administration and most recently a primary candidate for President. In the news for doxxing political donors in an apparent to attempt to deprive others of their civil rights. Reported here.

James Bennett, former long term editor of The Atlantic before becoming Editorial editor of the New York Times. Also brother of Michael Bennett, US Senator from Colorado and primary candidate for President of the US. Nothing like having a member of the family to help shape media coverage. Despite all the retractions and rewrites that might lead to - Another Headline the New York Times Has to Rewrite by James Freeman.

And there is, of course, all the political off-spring who make millions sitting on boards and foundations and other institutions closely dependent on the government for support and/or funding. The Chelsea Clintons, Hunter Bidens, and Christopher Heinzs of the swamp world.

Stonehenge Under Snow, 1947 by Bill Brandt

Stonehenge Under Snow, 1947 by Bill Brandt

Click to enlarge.

Monday, January 27, 2020

Fly Me To The Moon sung by Julie London

Fly Me To The Moon sung by Julie London


Double click to enlarge

Fly Me To The Moon
by Julie London

Fly me to the moon
And let me play among the stars
Let me see what spring is like
On Jupiter and Mars

In other words
Hold my hand
In other words
Darling, kiss me

Fill my heart with song
And let me sing forever more
You are all I long for
All I worship and adore

In other words
Please be true
In other words
I love you

Fill my heart with song
And let me sing forever more
You are all I long for
All I worship and adore

In other words
Please be true
In other words
I love you

A government system fatally weakened by airy ideals of republicanism

From the excellent Perilous Fight by Stephen Budiansky, an account of the naval aspects of the War of 1812. Page 31.
Above all, America’s government was a rickety experiment, indecisive and incapable of ever rising to the level of the world’s great powers. The Irish poet Thomas Moore, who visited America in 1804, saw in the vulgarity and roughness of American society a reflection of a government system fatally weakened by airy ideals of republicanism and lacking the steadying influence of a gentry and hereditary aristocracy. “The mail takes twelve passengers, “which generally consist of squalling children, stinking negroes, and republicans smoking cigars,” Moore complained. “How often it has occurred to me that nothing can be more emblematic of the government of this country than its stages, filled with a motley mixture, all ‘hail fellows well met,’ driving through mud and filth, which bespatters them as they raise it, and risking an upset at every step.”

Off Beat Humor


Click to enlarge.

Data Talks




The New Republic makes Charles Murray's argument

Whoa. I didn't see this coming.

The New Republic has long been a creature of the left. For some decades, a creature of the intellectual left. In that period, you wouldn't necessarily find much with which to agree but their articles could be interesting to read because they advanced solid arguments that challenged your own thinking. Post internet, they had a hard run trying to remain relevant. A run that ended up in a ditch when they were purchased by a Silicon Valley wunderkind with more good intentions and money than a viable business model.

Post wunderkind, they scraped bottom. Their articles have tended towards dogmatic Jacobean emotionalism rather than considered argument.

Today I come across an astonishing article from them. From Educated Fools Why Democratic Leaders Still Misunderstand the Politics of Social Class by Thomas Geoghegan.

I returned from growing up overseas in 1976 and one of the early and striking observations was how blind American commentary was to class. Much of what passed as racism in the US was demonstrably classism. As a callow teenager, I just classed it as one of those realities that puzzle but don't have ready explanations. Geoghegan is making the same argument here. Democrats, the former party of the working class, now is the party of racism, sexism, anti-semitism, oikophobia and class revulsion. I have discussed that puzzling transition in the past.

Geoghegan focuses on the oikophobia and class revulsion.
How many of us in the party’s new postgraduate leadership caste have even a single friendship, a real one, of two equals, with any man or woman who is just a high school graduate? It’s hard to imagine any Democrat in either House or Senate who did not go beyond a high school diploma. (And no, I am not talking about Harvard dropouts Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg.)


Still, it’s unthinkable that the college-educated base of the party would trust a high school graduate without a four-year degree to run for or hold a serious office. We don’t trust them, and would never vote for one of them. Why should they trust or vote for one of us?
This has echoes of the kerfuffle a few years ago when some conservative on twitter challenged liberal media reporters to identify whether they had ever owned a pick-up truck or had a single friend who owned a pick-up truck. The backlash was immense. Not in the sense "Of course, I own a pick-up", but the desperate sense of "It means nothing that I have never owned and would not be seen dead in the single largest category of vehicle sales in the US."

Very roughly, 70% of Americans do not have a college degree. Yet in the professional classes, virtually everyone has a college degree. Entire social networks are dense with degrees. To the exclusion, not intentional, of the 70%. Not just the exclusion, but the sheer unawareness of.

After thirty or forty years of rising class disdain from insiders for the middle class and below, they are in a panic when the tide of disdain has reversed. In the US, Britain, France, Germany, Spain, Sweden, etc. the people are beginning to vote in non-oikophobes and more class-tolerant leaders. This is characterized by the panicked insiders as rising populism but that is, I believe, a misdiagnosis. The majority are tired of incompetent, corrupt, intolerant, oikophobic, technocratic, class-obsessives and are looking for leaders to bring down those networks of arrogant ignorance.

Look at that passage again though. Who does Thomas Geoghegan, the Democratic insider, labor union lawyer, sound like?

Sure sounds like Charles Murray to me. Charles Murray the libertarian whose concerns about the rising isolation of the college-educated cognitive elite led him to write . . . The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life .
They also argue that those with high intelligence, the "cognitive elite", are becoming separated from those of average and below-average intelligence.

[snip]

Herrnstein and Murray offer a pessimistic portrait of America's future. They predict that a cognitive elite will further isolate itself from the rest of society, while the quality of life deteriorates for those at the bottom of the cognitive scale. As an antidote to this prognosis, they offer a vision of society where differences in ability are recognized and everybody can have a valued place, stressing the role of local communities and clear moral rules that apply to everybody.
Murray was focused primarily on class (its right there in the title) but he was demonized for his discussion of empirical data related to race.

Reviled as Murray was by the center and the left, his empirical research has been persistently replicated in the quarter century since its publication.

And Herrnstein and Murray's forecast seems to have hit pretty close to home. From 1994 to 2016, the cognitive technocrats without a concern in the world, feathered their nests while turning a blind eye to the wrenching costs imposed on the 70%.

And now the pendulum is swinging back. The 70% are demanding to be taken into account and respected by the 30%. As indeed they should be. One of the fundamentals of the Age of Enlightenment and certainly in the American founding is basic freedoms and universal natural rights. A conviction which has never been fulfilled but has always served as a guiding light for the majority. A guiding light that was shaded by the rise of the self-anointed cognitive elite.

I am astonished to see the New republic now advancing the arguments of Charles Murray, even if they are doing so unconsciously.

I see wonderful things




Interior of a Small Town, Kragerø by Theodor Kittelsen.

Interior of a Small Town, Kragerø by Theodor Kittelsen.

Click to enlarge.

Sunday, January 26, 2020

Bye Bye Blackbird

Bye Bye Blackbird sung by Julie London


DOuble click to enlarge.

Bye Bye Blackbird
by Julie London

Blackbird, blackbird singing the blues all day
Right outside of my door
Blackbird, blackbird who do you sit and say
There's no sunshine in store

All through the winter you hung around
Now I begin to feel homeward bound
Blackbird, blackbird gotta be on my way
Where there's sunshine galore

Pack up all my care and woe
Here I go, singing low
Bye bye blackbird
Where somebody waits for me
Sugar's sweet, so is she
Bye bye blackbird

No one here can love and understand me
Oh, what hard luck stories they all hand me
Make my bed and light the light
I'll arrive late tonight
Blackbird, bye bye

Bluebird bluebird calling me far away
I've been longing for you
Bluebird bluebird what do I hear you say
Skies are turning to blue

I'm like a flower that's fading here
Where ev'ry hour is one long tear
Bluebird bluebird this is my lucky day
Now my dreams will come true

Pack up all my care and woe
Here I go, singing low
Bye bye blackbird
Where somebody waits for me
Sugar's sweet, so is she
Bye bye blackbird

No one here can love and understand me
Oh, what hard luck stories they all hand me
Make my bed and light the light
I'll arrive late tonight
Blackbird, bye bye

The food was ill-cooked, the drinking excessive, the inns crowded, the street brawls savage.

From the excellent Perilous Fight by Stephen Budiansky, an account of the naval aspects of the War of 1812. Page 31.
The deeper problem was that most Britons did not really think of the America of 1800 as a real country. The Revolution had given America independence in name, but her claims to a place among the civilized nations of the world struck even sympathetic British observers as pretentious or simply laughable. America’s similarities to Britain only showed her enduring dependence on the mother country; her differences only reflected degeneracy or immaturity, proving how helpless the former colony was on her own. British critics found literally nothing praiseworthy about life in America. In science, art, and literature America was a nullity; “the destruction of her whole literature would not occasion so much regret as we feel for the loss of a few leaves from an antient classic,” pronounced the Edinburgh Review. American conversation consisted of nosy cross-examination of strangers. America’s colleges were little better than grammar schools. The food was ill-cooked, the drinking excessive, the inns crowded, the street brawls savage.

UPDATE: The day I scheduled this, a review came out, Journalists Hate You. by Daniel Addison. Addison reviews Antisocial: Online Extremists, Techno-Utopians, and the Hijacking of the American Conversation by Andrew Marantz. It is not worth linking to the book as it is one long lament from a statist lamenting that the unwashed are able, through the internet and social media, to involve themselves in politics and issues in a way professionally and commercially detrimental to the mainstream media slacker journalists.

Specifically,
Senior CNN Reporter Oliver Darcy says citizens resist his reporting because they “just won’t digest facts.” They, therefore, need guidance from gatekeepers; for Darcy, it’s a tragedy that “technology companies have … given everybody the same ability to broadcast their views, unfiltered really, to millions and millions of people.” New York Times columnist Kevin Roose also thinks we must shut the revolution down, lamenting how “YouTube, Reddit and Facebook have allowed fringe thinkers to bypass traditional gatekeepers and reach millions of people directly.”
Yep. Its a tragedy.
A significant new book by Andrew Marantz, a staff writer at the New Yorker, has reinvigorated the gatekeepers’ efforts to censor the internet. Antisocial: Online Extremists, Techno-Utopians, and the Hijacking of the American Conversation is an account of our ongoing democratic revolution, a historical moment that brings into relief two realizations for Marantz: (1) conservative influencers are now able to out-compete legacy media outlets, and (2) it was this that led to the election of Donald J. Trump. “[T]hey helped propel their man to the presidency,” he writes.

For Marantz, these two realizations justify all-out censorship of the internet. But his extremism comes as little surprise when you recognize that, from start to finish, Marantz’s argument is grounded in his contempt for the intellectual and moral capacities of ordinary Americans.
Having just written the British judgment about the uncouthness and lack of culture of those dynamic young Americans, it was impossible not to hear the ring of similarity.

In 2020, our journalistic preeners are appaled but
the intellectual and moral capacities of ordinary Americans
while for the establishment British in 1812:
American conversation consisted of nosy cross-examination of strangers. America’s colleges were little better than grammar schools. The food was ill-cooked, the drinking excessive, the inns crowded, the street brawls savage.
Same ignorant and arrogant disdain from insiders for the real people who drive real outcomes which benefit everyone. The hatred by insiders for aspiring and energetic outsiders is evergreen and knows no geographic or temporal boundaries.


Off Beat Humoe


Click to enlarge.

Data Talks




I see wonderful things




My Father’s Studio, 1940 by Andrew Wyeth

My Father’s Studio, 1940 by Andrew Wyeth

Click to enlarge.

Space Force as the harbinger of political reform via an Ark Fleet Ship B policy.

Saw this headline this morning:
Trump and the crisis of the meritocracy by Glenn Reynolds
and misread it as
Trump and the crisis of the mediocracy
Without reading the column, I suspect that the latter is closer to the heart of the matter than the first headline.

A meritocracy, with suitable checks and balances, has its good points but for the past twenty years we have had institutional mediocracy verging on malicious incompetence rather than the promised meritocracy. Institutions riddled with credentialed virtue-signalers but very few effective problem-solvers or systems thinkers.

When institutions fail to distinguish between credentialed celebrity and true expertise, the concept of a meritocracy begins to look in practice a lot more like an insider mediocracy.

Perhaps we are approaching the Golgafrinchan Ark Fleet Ship B moment in our global political development. Time to build Ark Fleet Ship B and load it up with deep staters, Ben Rhodes journalists, non-expert academics, postmodernists, intersectionalists, critical theory racists, third-wave feminist sexists, etc. If they'll believe in existential AGW, the threat of inequality, the superiority of socialism, the failure of free markets, college campus rape culture, the unimportance of IQ or culture, the dispensability of two parent families, etc. then they certainly will believe in the threat of being eaten by a mutant star goat.

With this train of thought, the roll out of the new Space Force logo carries heavier weight than one might otherwise think.


Space Force as the harbinger of political reform via an Ark Fleet Ship B policy. You heard it here first.

Saturday, January 25, 2020

Those slippers had nearly caused a diplomatic incident themselves.

I have just completed the thoroughly enjoyable Perilous Fight by Stephen Budiansky, an account of the naval aspects of the War of 1812. Excerpts to follow. Page 30.
“NO VISIT to America was complete for the British traveler of the early 1800s without a letter home laden with disdain for the vulgarity of the inhabitants. Americans were crude, loud, boastful, grasping—and they were ingrates to boot. Augustus J. Foster, secretary to the British legation in 1804, asserted that “from the Province of Maine to the borders of Florida, you would not find 30 men of Truth, Honour, or Integrity. Corruption, Immorality, Irreligion, and above all, self-interest, have corroded the very pillars on which their Liberty rests.” No more than five members of Congress could be considered gentlemen; the rest habitually appeared in “the filthiest dresses.” American women were “a spying, inquisitive, vulgar, and most ignorant race.” President Jefferson himself “is dressed and looks extremely like a plain farmer, and wears his slippers down at the heels.”

Those slippers had nearly caused a diplomatic incident themselves. When Foster’s principal, the new British minister Anthony Merry, came to present his credentials to the president, he arrived in full court dress, sash, ceremonial sword, and all. President Jefferson appeared in an old brown coat, faded corduroys, much-soiled linen, and those worn-down slippers. Merry was sure it was a calculated insult to him personally, and to his country officially. The British minister spent the next several months accumulating imagined insults from other displays of American informality, above all the careless egalitarianism of Jefferson’s hospitality at the White House. Jefferson made a point of dispensing with all the elaborate European rules of precedence of place in seating guests at his dinner table; his rule was what he termed “pêle-mêle”: guests found their own seats. This was all news to Merry, who was mortified when Mrs. Merry was not seated next to the president and he found himself elbowed aside by a member of the House of Representatives as he was about to sit down next to the wife of the Spanish minister. Even an official note from Secretary of State James Madison explaining the customs of his host country failed to convince Merry that it was anything but a premeditated plan to give offense.

Off Beat Humor


Click to enlarge.

Data Talks




How many people?

This is interesting news. Sometime in the 1980s I began discounting national population numbers. Not rejecting them, just making the assumption that they might not be correct. There were so many incentives for inflating them. Nationalists did it out of pride. Governments did it for World Bank and IMF loan reasons. Military governments did it for regional posturing.

Other countries whose numbers have seemed possibly inflated include Poland (40m), Brazil (210m), Bangladesh (165m), Nigeria (190m), Ethiopia (105m), Indonesia (265m), Egypt (100m). There are many others. Those numbers might be correct. But I think there is a real chance that they may be off significantly.


Even in the US where we have reasonably good numbers, there are incentives to inflate population estimates. Cities, for example, receive allocations of federal money based on headcount and there are a number of cities who historically inflate their estimate of annual population increases in the years between each census and then have to do an adjustment downwards at the end of the decade.

I see wonderful things




Xmas Eve, La veille de Noel 1950 by John Little

Xmas Eve, La veille de Noel 1950 by John Little

Click to enlarge.

Friday, January 24, 2020

Symbolic of his struggle with reality.

I watched Life of Brian for the first time in a couple of decades. Still as antically amusing as ever. In fact, it ages pretty well. At a distance, past the squalls of whether it was blasphemous, it can be taken more at face value.

I did not, in 1979, realize that I was watching a pre-documentary. A report in 1979, masked as a humorous skit set in Roman Judea, of dialog that would only actually emerge in the developed world in 2019.


Double click to enlarge.

Could the Pythons have ever anticipated that their absurd humor would one day become an article of faith for some?

Off Beat Humor


Click to enlarge.

Data Talks




Best of the Bee



I see wonderful things




The hundred anxious trivialities that poison everyday life

From A Time to Keep Silence by Patrick Leigh Fermor. Fermor was a magnificent travel author but not all his travels were across land. From the blurb.
Leigh Fermor writes about a more inward journey, describing his several sojourns in some of Europe’s oldest and most venerable monasteries. He stays at the Abbey of St. Wandrille, a great repository of art and learning; at Solesmes, famous for its revival of Gregorian chant; and at the deeply ascetic Trappist monastery of La Grande Trappe, where monks take a vow of silence. Finally, he visits the rock monasteries of Cappadocia, hewn from the stony spires of a moonlike landscape, where he seeks some trace of the life of the earliest Christian anchorites.
There is this striking passage about his stay in the French monastery, Abbey of St. Wandrille de Fonatanelle.
To begin with, I slept badly at night and fell asleep during the day, felt restless alone in my cell and depressed by the lack of alcohol, the disappearance of which had caused a sudden halt in the customary monsoon. The most remarkable preliminary symptoms were the variations of my need of sleep. After initial spells of insomnia, nightmare and falling asleep by day, I found that my capacity for sleep was becoming more and more remarkable: till the hours I spent in or on my bed vastly outnumbered the hours I spent awake; and my sleep was so profound that I might have been under the influence of some hypnotic drug. For two days, meals and the offices in the church—Mass, Vespers and Compline—were almost my only lucid moments. Then began an extraordinary transformation: this extreme lassitude dwindled to nothing; night shrank to five hours of light, dreamless and perfect sleep, followed by awakenings full of energy and limpid freshness. The explanation is simple enough: the desire for talk, movement and nervous expression that I had transported from Paris found, in this silent place, no response or foil, evoked no single echo; after miserably gesticulating for a while in a vacuum, it languished and finally died for lack of any stimulus or nourishment. Then the tremendous accumulation of tiredness, which must be the common property of all our contemporaries, broke loose and swamped everything. No demands, once I had emerged from that flood of sleep, were made upon my nervous energy: there were no automatic drains, such as conversation at meals, small talk, catching trains, or the hundred anxious trivialities that poison everyday life. Even the major causes of guilt and anxiety had slid away into some distant limbo and not only failed to emerge in the small hours as tormentors but appeared to have lost their dragonish validity. This new dispensation left nineteen hours a day of absolute and god-like freedom. Work became easier every moment; and, when I was not working, I was either exploring the Abbey and the neighbouring countryside, or reading. The Abbey became the reverse of a tomb—not, indeed, a Thelema or Nepenthe, but a silent university, a country house, a castle hanging in mid-air beyond the reach of ordinary troubles and vexations. A verse from the office of Compline expresses the same thought; and it was no doubt an unconscious memory of it that prompted me to put it down: Altissimum posuisti refugium tuum…non accedet ad te malum et flagellum non appropinquabit tabernaculo tuo.
The latter quote is Psalm 91 in Latin.
9 He, the Lord, is thy refuge; thou hast found a stronghold in the most High.
10 There is no harm that can befall thee, no plague that shall come near thy dwelling.
Written in 1953, how much more pertinent are Fermor's observations today?

I wonder, occasionally, of the mismatch of our cognitive world today in contrast to a hundred of five hundred years ago. The volume of things to notice, the requirements of cognitive switching across so many domains, the sheer deluge of information, the thousands of interactions with dozens or hundreds of people a day. Is it significant when contrasted with our evolutionary conditioning which occurred in nature among a few dozen people. When you might not meet more than a few hundred in a lifetime. I don't know, but it seems possibly consequential.

And what would happen if we stripped it all away? Not just disconnecting from email and the internet, but turning off the TV, discarding the newspapers, withdrawing from the bustle of interactions. Fermor tells us what happened to him and I suspect it would be a common response.

Albany in the snow, 1871 by Walter Launt Palmer

Albany in the snow, 1871 by Walter Launt Palmer

Click to enlarge.

Thursday, January 23, 2020

Off Beat Humor


Click to enlarge.

Data Talks




I see wonderful things




Reelin' In The Years by Steely Dan

Reelin' In The Years by Steely Dan


Click to enlarge.
Reelin' In The Years
by Steely Dan

Your everlasting summer
You can see it fading fast
So you grab a piece of something
That you think is gonna last
But you wouldn't know a diamond
If you held it in your hand
The things you think are precious
I can't understand

Are you reelin' in the years
Stowin' away the time
Are you gatherin' up the tears
Have you had enough of mine

Are you reelin' in the years
Stowin' away the time
Are you gatherin' up the tears
Have you had enough of mine

You been tellin' me you're a genius
Since you were seventeen
In all the time I've known you
I still don't know what you mean
The weekend at the college
Didn't turn out like you planned
The things that pass for knowledge
I can't understand

Are you reelin' in the years
Stowin' away the time
Are you gatherin' up the tears
Have you had enough of mine

Are you reelin' in the years
Stowin' away the time
Are you gatherin' up the tears
Have you had enough of mine

I spend a lot of money
And I spent a lot of time
The trip we made in Hollywood
Is etched upon my mind
After all the things we've done and seen
You find another man
The things you think are useless
I can't understand

Are you reelin' in the years
Stowin' away the time
Are you gatherin' up the tears
Have you had enough of mine

Are you reelin' in the years
Stowin' away the time
Are you gatherin' up the tears
Have you had enough of mine

High Noon, 1949 by Edward Hopper

High Noon, 1949 by Edward Hopper

Click to enlarge.

Same event, two movies.

Scott Adams speaks of people watching two movies - the same flow of facts and dialog but with two different interpretations of what is happening in the movie.

A couple of minor examples of that which come together this morning.

Sometime in the past 2-3 days I picked up commentary from NPR related to when President Bill Clinton was impeached for lying about his workplace dalliance with a subordinate. The claim made was that he turned over 90,000 pages of documents to the House during its investigation.

Something did not sit quite right with the claim. While 90,000 pages sounds like a lot, is it really? My email account over the past decade would printout as more than 90,000 pages. I am not sure that 90,000 pages is as impressive a metric as is implied. Second, I remember those proceedings reasonably well. Clinton was under continuous investigation from soon after his election - Whitewater, Filegate, Travelgate are the things that spring to mind. Sex in the Oval office was an incidental discovery to the financial and operational crimes alleged.

The House impeachment investigation was just another investigation. Clinton fought all of those investigations, refusing to the last minute and under judicial duress, to turn over documents. Did he really cooperate with the House investigation.

Listening to the claim on the radio, a claim repeated by multiple interviewees and pundits, that didn't sound quite right. That's only twenty years ago. Why are the media accepting the claim so glibly? It should be easy to question.

As Byron York does in Impeachment, Democrats, and those 90,000 documents. So am I misremembering or are the media pundits misrepresenting? B.
So a question: Where did the figure of 90,000 pages, or documents, come from? Did Clinton helpfully cooperate with the House Republicans who were trying to remove him from office 20 years ago?

It turns out Schiff, Pelosi, and their colleagues were not telling the whole story. They got the 90,000 figure, apparently, from Clinton's rebuttal to the Starr report — the report independent counsel Kenneth Starr turned over to Congress on Sept. 9, 1998, after seven months of investigating the Monica Lewinsky affair. In that rebuttal, given to Congress on Sept. 11, Clinton's lawyers wrote: "During the past four and a half years, the President has ... produced more than 90,000 pages of documents and other items" to investigators.

But not to Congress. The Clinton situation was entirely different from the one Schiff and his fellow Democrats face today. Starr was an independent counsel with full law enforcement powers, and his office issued many grand jury subpoenas pushing Clinton, who often resisted fiercely, to turn over the 90,000 documents over the course of four and a half years, covering the Whitewater, Travelgate, Filegate, and Lewinsky investigations.

"If memory serves me correctly, I don't think he voluntarily gave us anything," said Sol Weisenberg, a former Starr prosecutor, in a conversation Tuesday.
York is a partisan commentator so his position needs to be taken with a grain of salt as well but it matches much more closely with my own recollection.

So back to the movie. We hear the same dialog - 90,000 pages. One person, by youth or poor memory or partisan commitment or faith in the media or lack of reading, hears 90,000 and imputes significance. I hear the same claim and because I read excessively and remember much and lived through that period and recall the events, I impute bad faith argument. One dialog, two movies.

Then there was this flap from a couple of days ago reported by Ed Driscoll in Nazis, Nazis, Everywhere! Talia Lavin was the New Yorker magazine fact-checker who had to resign a couple of years ago after claiming an ICE agent had a Nazi tattoo. He was a badly injured veteran who had a military tattoo which she simply failed to recognize. Nothing to do with Nazi's. She apologized and resigned. Bad incident but a reasonable outcome in that media people have the capacity to destroy ordinary people's lives and careers through simple malicious carelessness.

Well, she's back. And still watching the other movie. There was the demonstration in Virginia this week in support of second amendment rights. Despite all the preparatory scare stories heralding riots and massacres, it went off without a hiccough. Some 20,000 people, many heavily armed, strolled around Richmond. There were amusing placards galore. I especially liked

Click to enlarge.

And harsh but humorous partisan memes of course.

Click to enlarge.

And then there was Talia Lavin's take:

Click to enlarge.

To which Driscoll responds.
Julio Rosas of Townhall tweets, “Oh look, another person who was *not* at the rally trying to tell everyone else that it wasn’t *really* peaceful. The article also does not mention or acknowledge the hundreds of minorities, who were armed as well, that were there in support of the rally.”
Its all a bunch of partisan sniping at one another.

One of the inadvertent points is that of course you have to read the media skeptically.

The other is that there are always two movies playing. Peaceful, diverse, good-natured, amusing American demonstration for civil rights or yet another nazi related disturbance? Same event, two movies.