|
| |
Mexifornia-How the cult of "Multiculturalism" ruining the nation (san mateo) |
| We know Dick Lamm as the former Democrat Governor of Colorado. In that context his thoughts are particularly poignant. Last week there was an immigration ... |
We know Dick Lamm as the former Democrat Governor of Colorado. In that context his thoughts are particularly poignant. Last week there was an immigration overpopulation conference in Washington, DC, filled to capacity by many of American's finest minds and leaders.
A brilliant college professor by the name of Victor Hansen Davis talked about his latest book, Mexifornia," explaining how immigration - both legal and illegal" was destroying the entire state of California. He said it would march across the country until it destroyed all vestiges of The American Dream.
Moments later, former Colorado Governor Richard D. Lamm stood up and gave a stunning speech on how to destroy America. The audience sat spellbound as he described eight methods for the destruction of the United States.
He said, "If you believe that America is too smug, too self-satisfied, too rich, then let's destroy America. It is not that hard to do. No nation in history has survived the ravages of time. Arnold Toynbee observed that all great civilizations rise and fall and that 'An autopsy of history would show that all great nations commit suicide.'"
Here is how they do it," Lamm said: "First, to destroy America, turn America into a bilingual or multi-lingual and bicultural country. "History shows that no nation can survive the tension, conflict, and antagonism of two or more competing languages and cultures. It is a blessing for an individual to be bilingual; however, it is a curse for a society to be bilingual.
The historical scholar, Seymour Lipset, put it this way: "The histories of bilingual and bi-cultural societies that do not assimilate are histories of turmoil, tension, and tragedy." Canada, Belgium, Malaysia, and Lebanon all face crises of national existence in which minorities press for autonomy, if not independence. Pakistan and Cyprus have divided. Nigeria suppressed an ethnic rebellion. France faces difficulties with Basques, Bretons, and Corsicans.".
Lamm went on: Second, to destroy America, "Invent 'multiculturalism' and encourage immigrants to maintain their culture. I would make it an article of belief that all cultures are equal. That there are no cultural differences. I would make it an article of faith that the Black and Hispanic dropout rates are due solely to prejudice and discrimination by the majority. Every other explanation is out of bounds.
Third, "We could make the United States an 'Hispanic Quebec' without much effort. As Benjamin Schwarz said in the Atlantic Monthly recently: "The apparent success of our own multiethnic and multicultural experiment might have been achieved not by tolerance but by hegemony. Without the dominance that once dictated ethnocentricity and what it meant to be an American, we are left with only tolerance and pluralism to hold us together."
Lamm said, "I would encourage all immigrants to keep their own language and culture. I would replace the melting pot metaphor with the salad bowl metaphor. It is important to ensure that we have various cultural subgroups living in America enforcing their differences rather than as Americans, emphasizing their similarities."
"Fourth, I would make our fastest growing demographic group the least educated. I would add a second underclass, unassimilated, undereducated, and antagonistic to our population. I would have this second underclass have a 50% dropout rate from high. school."
"My fifth point for destroying America would be to get big foundations and business to give these efforts lots of money. I would invest in ethnic identity, and I would establish the cult of 'Victimology.' I would get all minorities to think that their lack of success was the fault of the majority. I would start a grievance industry blaming all minority failure on the majority population."
"My sixth plan for America's downfall would include dual citizenship, and promote divided loyalties. I would celebrate diversity over unity. I would stress differences rather than similarities. Diverse people worldwide are mostly engaged in hating each other - that is, when they are not killing each other. A diverse, peaceful, or stable society is against most historical precedent. People undervalue the unity it takes to keep a nation together. Look at the ancient Greeks. The Greeks believed that they belonged to the same race; they possessed a common language and literature; and they worshipped the same gods. All Greece took part in the Olympic games. A common enemy, Persia, threatened their liberty. Yet all these bonds were not strong enough to overcome two factors: local patriotism and geographical conditions that nurtured political divisions. Greece fell. "E. Pluribus Unum" -- >From many, one.
In that historical reality, if we put the emphasis on the 'pluribus'. Instead of the 'Unum,' we will balkanize America as surely as Kosovo."
"Next to last, I would place all subjects off limits; make it taboo to talk about anything against the cult of 'diversity.' I would find a word similar to 'heretic' in the 16th century – that stopped discussion and paralyzed thinking. Words like 'racist' or 'xenophobe' halt discussion and debate. Having made America a bilingual/bicultural country, having established multi-culturism, having the large foundations fund the doctrine of 'Victimology,' I would next make it impossible to enforce our immigration laws. I would develop a mantra: That because immigration has been good for America, it must always be good. I would make every individual immigrant symmetric and ignore the cumulative impact of millions of them."
In the last minute of his speech, Governor Lamm wiped his brow. Profound silence followed. Finally he said,. "Lastly, I would censor Victor Hanson Davis's book Mexifornia. His book is dangerous. It exposes the plan to destroy America. If you feel America deserves to be destroyed, don't read that book.".
There was no applause. A chilling fear quietly rose like an ominous cloud above every attendee at the conference. Every American in that room knew that everything Lamm enumerated was proceeding methodically, quietly, darkly, yet pervasively across the United States today.
Discussion is being suppressed. Over 100 languages are ripping the foundation of our educational system and national cohesiveness. Even barbaric cultures that practice female genital mutilation are growing as we celebrate 'diversity.' American jobs are vanishing into the Third World as corporations create a Third World in America -
take note of California and other states - to date, ten million illegal aliens and growing fast. It is reminiscent of George Orwell's book "1984." In that story, three slogans are engraved in the Ministry of Truth building:
"War is peace," "Freedom is slavery," and "Ignorance is strength." Governor Lamm walked back to his seat. It dawned on everyone at the conference that our nation and the future of this great democracy is deeply in trouble and worsening fast. If we don't get
this immigration monster stopped within three years, it will rage like a California wildfire and destroy everything in its path, especially The American Dream.
|
| |
The Booming Domestic Violence Industry |
| "This industry is an octopus," he said recently. "It s got its tentacles in more and more parts of everyday life. It s a political movement. Many of its ... |
"This industry is an octopus," he said recently. "It's got its tentacles in more and more parts of everyday life. It's a political movement. Many of its employees are, directly or indirectly, damaging children. This industry doesn't answer to anybody. They're in it mainly for the money -- and the children be damned." The industry's problems may be about to increase, because it is becoming clear through scientific research that the whole premise of the movement and the industry it spawned -- that "domestic violence" means bad men hitting helpless, innocent women -- is just plain wrong.
Massachusetts News
The Booming Domestic Violence Industry
The Social-Work Movement that Fights Domestic Violence has Grown Large on State and Federal Tax Monies
Massachusetts News
By John Maguire
August 2--All across Massachusetts, the social-work movement that fights domestic violence is booming.
Only ten years ago, the women's safety-advocates were a small group of idealists, operating on pennies. Today the movement has grown large on state and federal tax monies.
Every month, it seems, it spawns new sub-programs, clinics, shelters, research institutes, counseling centers, visitation centers, poster campaigns. The state disbursed about $24 million for domestic violence services last year, but that certainly is not all the money spent. Today domestic violence is a big industry in Massachusetts.
Mapping the full extent of the domestic-violence industry is not easy, because it's a cottage-industry, spread out in hundreds of places. State and federal money goes to well over a hundred institutes, clinics, programs for counseling or outreach or coordination or training, computer databases, coalitions, shelters, PR agencies and other groups.
Most would say that's just fine: Domestic violence is ugly and ought to be dealt with. (Been there! --Ed.) But others are beginning to wonder if the huge industrial cure is as bad as the disease.
One of many critics is John Flaherty, co-chairman of the Fatherhood Coalition. "This industry is an octopus," he said recently. "It's got its tentacles in more and more parts of everyday life. It's a political movement. Many of its employees are, directly or indirectly, damaging children. This industry doesn't answer to anybody. They're in it mainly for the money -- and the children be damned." The industry's problems may be about to increase, because it is becoming clear through scientific research that the whole premise of the movement and the industry it spawned -- that "domestic violence" means bad men hitting helpless, innocent women -- is just plain wrong.
The truth about violence in the home is that it's pretty much a 50-50 thing. Respected social scientists Murray A. Straus and David Gelles have been publishing research for years that shows the standard Only-Men-Batter story--probably visible on a billboard near you -- just doesn't match reality. Women and men attack each other about equally in the home. Solid research now shows that women begin the physical fighting in their homes about half the time. Equally solid research shows that mothers are responsible for 65 per cent of physical abuse of children.
Although the words "domestic" violence are commonly used, some commentators say that a better description would be "shack-up" violence, because violence is most common, especially where children are involved where the woman is living with a boy friend. In a piece in the Weekly Standard last December by John A. Barnes, he cited four studies which show "that the incidence of abuse was an astounding 33 times higher in homes where the mother was cohabiting with an unrelated boyfriend than in a stable nuclear family.
The uncomfortable truth is spreading. The very liberal, if not PC magazine Mother Jones ran a news story last month admitting as much. "A surprising fact has turned up in the grimly familiar world of domestic violence," reported Nancy Updike. She wrote: "Women report using violence in their relationships more often than men. The research disputes a long held belief about the nature of domestic violence -- that if a woman hits, it's only in response to her partner's attacks."
The writer admitted that 20-year-old myths in the movement were starting to fall. The study of 860 men and women, she said, "suggest that some women may be prone to violence -- by nature of circumstance -- just as some men may be."
Looking at the Bottom Line $$$
In 1999, the state spent $24 million of its own and federal tax dollars
"fighting has grown large on state and federal tax monies violence." The budgets have risen steadily every year. Slightly more than half of that money ($13.6 million) goes to pay for 37 battered women's shelters and to pay their staff. There are no shelters or services for men who are victims of domestic violence -- only women or homosexual men get these services.
About a fifth of the money ($5.3 million) is spent in and around the courts, paying for prosecutors, legal representation for women, and training for court personnel.
Of the remainder, at least $1 million goes to posters, ads, and other "outreach" campaigns telling people not to be violent. The high-school campaign gathers teen-agers to watch a play called "The Yellow Dress." Its point is that dating can end in murder, and men should not be trusted. It costs the state $500,000 each year.
"Massachusetts and the Boston region have been very successful in winning federal money," said Clare Dalton, of the Northeastern University Domestic Violence Institute.
"We've got some federal money here. The Police Department has also been very successful in getting federal money."
Federal money for domestic violence programs flows into the state in several streams. One large source is the Victims of Crime Act money, which is disbursed by the Massachusetts Office of Victim Assistance. Another source of big federal dollars is the federal Violence Against Women Act, which is administered by the Executive Office of Public Safety (EOPS). Both MOVA and EOPS are located in state offices at 1 Ashburton Place, next to the State House. MOVA's on the 11th floor, EOPS is on the 21st.
Getting answers even to simple questions on how much money is being spent is not easy. (And it can even lead to getting slapped with a fraudulent restraining order. --Ed.) Three weeks of repeated calls and visits to staffers in the Cellucci administration brought sluggish or no response. Jean Hurtle, the Executive Director of the Governor's Commission on Domestic Violence, when asked repeatedly for a fact sheet on how much money was being spent in this field produced nothing. Jason Kauppi, an executive office press aide, failed to respond to roughly ten phone calls requesting information on the domestic violence budget. The figures above and in the accompanying box came from the staff of Sen. Steven Panagiotakos, D-Lowell.
According to Cam Huff of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, budgets at the Department of Social Services have risen almost seven per cent per year, since 1993. Compared with the overall budget, he says, this is "significantly higher than average."
Restraining Order -- How Many is too many?
If the domestic violence industry were an old-fashioned textile mill, the central power-shaft turning all its machinery would be the 209A restraining order. Judges issue them at the rate of 145 a day, according to the Boston Globe. Without the steady roll of restraining orders, all the machinery of the domestic violence industry would grind to a halt.
To the activists, the 209A law is almost a magic sword that saves women's lives. "There's almost a religion of restraining orders among women's advocates," commented Ray Saulnier, a fathers' rights activist from Maine.
But a growing number of men, their relatives, and lawyers find the 209A law grossly unfair -- almost a police-state tool that destroys families and saves very few. Recent efforts to reform the law have gained sympathetic hearings in the Legislature.
On the books for 20 years, 209A became the tool of choice for the activists in the early 1990s. Almost every year since then, that scope of the law has been expanded, and the grounds for defense diminished. Activists have sought and gained almost draconian powers for women, on the argument of a "crisis" in domestic violence.
As the law has expanded, its enforcers have multiplied. Today this state has hundreds if not thousands of 209A specialists who have been trained. Training in getting restraining orders, and in helping and urging women to get them occupies a significant amount of the curriculum at Northeastern University's Domestic Violence Institute internship program. Federally paid advocates in many if not all district and probate courts in the state are also trained to assist women in getting restraining orders. To the movement/industry, the restraining order is a shining sacred sword (How phallic! --Ed.) of power that can never do harm, but magically protects women and children at all times.
The restraining orders bring the police power of the state immediately to the woman's protection, and the man she says she is afraid of is immediately thrown out of his house, if not arrested.
Tool of Police State?
But to others, a restraining order looks an awful lot like the tool of a police state. Attorney Sheara Friend, of the Wellesley firm Kahalas, Warshaw & Friend, estimates that about half of all restraining orders are merely legal maneuvers, where there is no real fear of injury on anyone's part. If she's right, about 20,000 of this state's restraining orders each year have nothing to do with domestic violence -- other than to claim it. If each of those phony orders harms seven people (a father, two kids, two grandparents and two other relatives) then 140,000 Massachusetts citizens suffer needless disruption and emotional pain each year.
About ten years ago, some evidence was required. Someone had to show bruises, or bring in testimony to support the accusation.
The legislature has loosened the standard. Now the person seeking the order need only state he or she is "in fear" of the other person.
It doesn't take a cynic to point out that when a woman is getting a divorce, what she may truly fear is not violence, but losing the house or kids. Under 209A, if she's willing to fib to the judge and say she is "in fear" of her children's father, she will get custody and money and probably the house.
"Mediation and communication counseling are critical in a divorce," says Sheara Friend. "The 209A non-contact order prevents that. Especially if it's a divorce that involves children, you need the parties talking with each other. The 209A completely stops that. It's a very divisive thing to do right at the time the parties need to talk. You can't even get the parties in the same building."
Bad For Fathers & Children
Long-term emotional damage to children's fathers -- surely not good for children -- often begins with a restraining order, she says.
"A man against whom a frivolous 209A has been brought starts to lose any power in his divorce proceeding. They do start decompensating, and they do start to have emotional issues, and they do start developing post-traumatic stress disorders. They keep replaying in their minds the tape of what happened to them in court. It starts this whole vicious downward cycle. They've been embarrassed and shamed in front of their family and friends, unjustly, and they totally lose any sense of self-control and self-respect. They may indeed become verbally abusive. It's difficult for the court to see where that person was prior to the restraining order."
This is a different era from the 1950s, she points out, and many fathers are very close to their children, and bond closely with them from an early age.
"In this day and age, we have fathers who take an extremely active role in parenting -- sometimes more than the mother."
"I call them mother-dads," she says. In many restraining-order cases, she says, "These fathers are completely frustrated because they can't co-parent their child because of a restraining order. They have been raped of their parenting relationship with their child."
While Friend and others see false restraining orders as enormously destructive, and permanently traumatizing, the $24 million domestic violence industry is built on the restraining order. Most of the activities that people get paid for in the domestic violence industry cannot start until a restraining order has been issued.
Permanent Lifetime Record
The restraining order is entered into the state's restraining order registry on a computer in downtown Boston. It is never deleted. Police officers, probation officers and judges have the right to check the database.
What will it do to someone's career if they are in there indefinitely and an employer somehow calls in to check? "We can't respond to that question," said Coria Holland, press person for the Mass Probation Service. "Probation is just the conduit for getting the information into the system. We're just the recording arm."
(Here we have a conundrum. There are civil restraining orders ... and there are criminal restraining orders. Criminal restraining orders are associated with a probationary period, after sentencing ... which involves mandatory legal representation, before a jury of one's peers. Civil restraining orders do not have the check and balancing of legal representation, and they do not have the check and balancing providing by a jury, selected at random. The officer's statement, above, would seem to indicate that they cannot be troubled to distinguish between the two [and, indeed, they do not] ... leading to someone who is not a criminal, being treated as a criminal, and gunned down, over a misunderstanding or falsehood, as a result of being misportrayed as violent, when such was not the case. Indeed, this has been known to happen, and there are even indications that it has been done after deliberation, by the parties whom made the accusation, in pursuit of exactly this sort of conclusion. --Ed.)
Supervised Visitation: Paying $120 for 90 minutes with your kid
"Supervised visitation" is a booming part of the industry today. In 1994, only three visitation centers existed -- they were pilot projects in Springfield, Roxbury and Brockton. Today, there are 13 state-funded centers absorbing nearly a million dollars a year. These centers not only get state funding, they also charge fathers for the privilege of seeing their own offspring. Rates go as high as $120 for ninety minutes.
The assumption "is that a lot of dads are abusing their children and their access to their children must be supervised," declares Michael Ewing, a fatherhood activist. Though research suggests this assumption is completely false, the supervised visitation industry has skyrocketed anyway.
The centers strongly assume that children's fathers are guilty of some unnamed crime. Caring fathers with the bad luck to be accused often endure insulting, exploitative treatment to see their children. They complain rarely, because the social workers can and do end visitation for little or no reason.
Pamela Whitney, a social worker who came to the Massachusetts Department of Social Services in 1986 as a consultant, (IE, she had friends in high places. --Ed.) has been Director of Domestic Violence and Family Support Services since 1994. Her office is at 24 Farnsworth Street in Boston. She supervises a budget that was $13.6 million last year, and may go higher.
She says supervised visitation is recommended "where there has been a separation between the parents and a history of domestic abuse."
When challenged, she backtracks and admits she meant to say "accusation of domestic abuse."
She says her department pushed for visitation centers, beginning with three pilot centers in the early 1990s. The department recommended expansion, "because the courts found it so helpful and useful." Now there are 13. She said her goal was to have at least one in every county. More are probably coming.
"The feeling on the part of the courts and others was it was often unsafe for children to visit with their offending parent," she said. She acknowledged that when she said "offending parent" she meant a parent who had been accused of an offence.
Each state-supported visitation center is funded by D.S.S. to such a level that it has at least $75,000 to work with. The money goes to fund staff and a "budget coordinator." The coordinator "does outreach to the courts and other agencies." D.S.S. funds also pay, she said, for "the people who are actually doing the visit between the parent and child."
"Some visits don't need to be supervised," she said. "But in other cases where there is higher risk involved ... this provides supervision for those who are doing the actual visit." The observers are trained according to "guidelines" developed by the central nexus for DV policy in the state, the Governor's Commission on Domestic Violence.
She acknowledged that the same accusation that forces a man into a center, also forces him to pay both his and his wife's fees. "If A says that B is abusive, then B has to pay the money," she said.
Ms. Whitney said she thought the sliding scales ranged from $1 to $5, and that an indigent parent could do community service to pay for his visitation time.
But in reality, at least in Robert Straus' center in Cambridge, the sliding scale runs from $20 to $40 or $80 per hour, and any parent who cannot pay cannot see his children.
Asked her reaction to the case of the father of three who recently had to pay The Meeting Place $120 to see his children for 90 minutes, she said, "I've never heard of such a thing. One hundred twenty dollars a visit is extraordinary."
"All these visitations have been ordered because the children involved are at risk," explains Robert Straus, a lawyer and social worker, and currently director of the Meeting Place, in Cambridge. Straus has been a key figure in our state's development of professional supervised visitation. Asked to explain "at risk", he says: "You have a range of physical and sexual abuse situations where the parent is either alleged to be, or been proved to, abuse the child."
"As you know," he adds, confidentially, "there have been a number of deaths in Massachusetts." When asked to name an actual child's death he was referring to, however, he said he could not remember.
Straus has been part of an informal matrix of lawyers, judges, social workers, academics and domestic violence activists since the early 1990s. These people, some idealistic and some merely pragmatic, have networked, talked with each other, served on various commissions, boosted each other' s careers, and helped to expand the definition of domestic violence, and the size of state and federal funding massively.
Straus is a leader now, and heads what is called the Supervised Visitation Network. He described the growth of that group in glowing, emotional terms during a phone interview.
"The Supervised Visitation Network started in 1992. A group of people met in New York through the Ethical Culture Society, which had started a supervised visitation program in New York City. At that point it was just 30 people from around the country, most of whom had never met anyone else doing supervision. We had all been working in isolation. It was an extremely high energy meeting. It was very much an informal association of people helping each other out. It began with a handful of members and now has over 400 members throughout the U.S., Canada, and Australia. It's a fascinating field ... because when it began it was virtually without funding."
But not any more. Though The Meeting Place began in 1991 with only a grant from the Boston Bar Foundation, and continued to 1998 "without a penny of public money" that public money is starting to flow now, Straus admits with a tone of satisfaction.
The major state source is through the state DSS Domestic Violence Unit, whose budget of over $900,000 "has been an immense advance over the last few years.."
What if the father doesn't have enough money to see his kid in a given week? "Difficult question," answers Straus, who pauses and then says the father gets "a week's grace" and then the child-father contact is cut off.
His program never tries to get husbands and wives to talk out their problems privately, he said, but urges them to go back to court instead. He said children are in visitation for long periods, from nine months to many years. He said that no matter how well, how happily, the father-child interaction is going, his program never recommends to the judge that supervision should end and normal parent-child contact resume.
These programs have sprung up all across America " entrepreneurial tricks and ideas spread easily each summer at this industry's conferences. Wherever supervised visitation has appeared, criticism has followed.
In Virginia, Michael Ewing, president of the Virginia Fatherhood Initiative, has an unusual perspective. He is one of the few pro-father people ever to run a "visitation center." His non-profit organization applied for and got a federal grant to negotiate access and visitation issues between divorced parents. He hoped to show that in situations of conflict between divorced parents, supervised visitation was not necessary. He sees such programs as "designed to humiliate men." In his program's first year, the Norfolk area courts made more than 700 case referrals. "We solved all of the problems but two," Ewing said. "Only two families required supervised visitation."
(And there are about as many ways to handle most of the situations which are currently being addressed by so-called 'domestic violence' restraining orders, also. --Ed.)
"There are many ways to handle the exchange of children without having parents supervised. We ran a neutral pickup and drop off program and there were no problems. We made clear to parents that they had to be 'model citizens' during drop off, or they would be reported to the court."
He said the supervised visitation idea has been " beefed up with phony statistics" and there is very little need for it.
Solid research shows that most physical child abuse is done by mothers, or by mothers' live-in boyfriends. Ewing is one of many in the fathers' movement who wonder why natural fathers " who in reality are quite unlikely to abuse their own children " are targeted for the humiliation of supervision "I think there's another agenda here," he says. "Some special interest women's groups think that males in general are disposable. We're great sperm donors and paychecks " but beyond that there's not much need for good fathers or good men."
He said he thinks supervised visitation came about "because women wanted to con- trol the dad's access to their children, and to humiliate them by making them see their children in the presence of a social worker and pay for the privilege of doing so."
Perhaps because of its success, Michael Ewing's non-visitation-center approach to family conflict lost its funding in the second year. He said he thinks a local social worker who had lost clients due to Ewing's success complained to an influential state senator.
How many of these supervision cases really require supervision for the safety of the children? Michael Ewing doesn't think very many: he found two cases out of 700.
But the domestic violence entrepreneurs and state officials live in a different world from us. A sense of nameless vague threat is always in the background. To hear the pros talk, all the men they deal with are batterers, sexual abusers, or virtually time bombs of violence. Repeated cliches like "at risk" and "a safe place" and "maintaining safety" pepper their sentences. Yet, in many cases, there is no evidence of violence or any kind of serious harm to children " merely an accusation by the mother. But in the DV industry, when the accusation is made, the case is closed.
At least some of the men interviewed for this story are devoted fathers. It is clear that some have heroically maintained contact with their children over a period of years, despite having to pay a small fortune in cash and endure repeated harassment by petty, vindictive state officials. During a dozen hours of telephone interviews, not one supervised-visitation official spoke any word of praise for any man's love of his children.
|
| |
RE:Give illegals amnesty (berkeley)Part 2 |
| The Parent Trap How safety fanatics help drive down birthrates. BY GLENN HARLAN REYNOLDS Wednesday, May 24, 2006 12:01 a.m. EDT http://www.opinionjournal.com/federation/feature/?id=110008417Not ... |
The Parent Trap
How safety fanatics help drive down birthrates.
BY GLENN HARLAN REYNOLDS
Wednesday, May 24, 2006 12:01 a.m. EDT
http://www.opinionjournal.com/federation/feature/?id=110008417
Not long ago we worried about baby booms and overpopulation. Now some people are worrying about a "Global Baby Bust." Writing in Foreign Affairs, Phillip Longman says it's mostly because of economics:
In nations rich and poor, under all forms of government, as more and more of the world's population moves to urban areas in which children offer little or no economic reward to their parents, and as women acquire economic opportunities and reproductive control, the social and financial costs of childbearing continue to rise.
In the United States, the direct cost of raising a middle-class child born this year through age 18, according to the Department of Agriculture, exceeds $200,000--not including college. And the cost in forgone wages can easily exceed $1 million, even for families with modest earning power. Meanwhile, although Social Security and private pension plans depend critically on the human capital created by parents, they offer the same benefits, and often more, to those who avoid the burdens of raising a family.
He's clearly right about the economics. Children used to provide cheap labor and retirement security, all in one. Now they're pretty much all cost and no return, from a financial perspective. That suggests that subsidies might solve the problem. Vladimir Putin thinks so, as he plans to offer generous parental benefits to encourage citizens to have more children, something that's necessary as Russia's population is in absolute decline. Italy, which is also in demographic free-fall, is doing something similar.
Meanwhile, in the United States, commentator John Gibson is calling for "procreation, not recreation." But I think that attitude is part of the problem. As an old-timer once reportedly said in response to the "Make love, not war" slogan: "Hell, in my time we did both."
But Mr. Gibson's slogan unwittingly captures an important aspect of the problem, in the U.S. and other industrial societies, at least: We've taken a lot of the fun out of parenting. Or to echo Mr. Longman, the "social costs" of parenting continue to rise, and, more significantly, perhaps, the "social returns" continue to decline.
Parenting was always hard work, of course. But aside from the economic payoffs, parents used to get a lot of social benefits, too. Yet in recent decades, a collection of parenting "experts" and safety-fascist types have extinguished some of the benefits while raising the costs, to the point where what's amazing isn't that people are having fewer kids, but that people are having kids at all.
This occurred to me recently while reading Caitlin Flanagan's new book, "To Hell With All That: Loving and Loathing Our Inner Housewife." Ms. Flanagan's book is mostly a comparison of her own housewifely and maternal life with that of her mother, and one thing that struck me is how much of what counted as acceptable--or even exemplary--parenting a generation ago would now be considered abuse and neglect. Here's an example:
My mother was by no means indifferent about me: I was her pet, the baby of the family. But back then children were not under constant adult supervision, even if their mothers were housewives. By the time I was five, I was allowed to wander away from the house as long as I didn't cross any big streets. I had the run of the neighborhood at six. . . . A nine-year-old could be trusted with a key; a nine-year-old knew how to work a telephone if anything went wrong. Moreover, anxiety as a precondition of the maternal experience had not yet been invented."
Nowadays, of course, children don't get the same treatment. I have heard repeatedly that my state's Department of Children's Services considers it neglect to leave a 9-year-old alone in the house for any time at all. Today's middle-class kids are always under the adult eye. It's not clear that the kids are better off for all this supervision--and they're certainly fatter, perhaps because they get around less outside--but the burden on parents is much, much higher. And it's exacted in a million tiny yet irritating other ways. Some are worthwhile--car seats, for example, are probably a net gain in safety--but even there the cost is high. I heard a radio host in Knoxville, Tenn., making fun of SUVs and minivans: When he was a kid, he boasted, his parents took their five children cross-country in an Impala sedan. Nowadays, you'd never make it without being cited for neglect. And you can't get five kids in a sedan if they all have to have car seats, which these days they seem to require until they're 18.
Likewise, Ms. Flanagan notes the pressure to take children for a seemingly endless array of after-school activities, most of which require parental chauffering. Add to this the increasing amount of parental responsibility for things their children do wrong, coupled with steady legal diminution of parental authority (Ms. Flanagan mentions an incident in which Caroline Kennedy was spanked for running off and notes that today it might result in jail time--an exaggeration, perhaps, but not by much.) You're responsible for your kids in ways previous generations weren't, but your ability to discipline them is much reduced; and as my wife, a forensic psychologist, notes, the bad kids know that they can cow most adults by threatening to call 911 and make a bogus abuse charge. And forget disciplining your child, even with a harsh word, in a public place. At the very least, if you do you'll be looked on not as a virtuous parent helping to preserve the social fabric, but as that worst of all sinners in contemporary American culture: a meanie. And schools, anxious for parental "involvement," place far more demands on parents than they did when I was a kid.
There's also the decline in parental prestige over generations. My mother reports that when she was a newlywed (she married in 1959) you weren't seen as fully a member of the adult world until you had kids. Nowadays to have kids means something closer to an expulsion from the adult world. People in the suburbs buy SUVs instead of minivans not because they need the four-wheel-drive capabilities, but because the SUVs lack the minivan's close association with low-prestige activities like parenting, and instead provide the aura of high-prestige activities like whitewater kayaking. Why should kayaking be more prestigious than parenting? Because parenting isn't prestigious in our society. If it were, childless people would drive minivans just to partake of the aura.
In these sorts of ways, parenting has become more expensive in nonfinancial as well as financial terms. It takes up more time and emotional energy than it used to, and there's less reward in terms of social approbation. This is like a big social tax on parenting and, as we all know, when things are taxed we get less of them. Yes, people still have children, and some people even have big families. But at the margin, which is where change occurs, people are less likely to do things as they grow more expensive and less rewarded.
So as we head into what looks like a major demographic debate, I think we need to look beyond subsidies and finances to culture. If people want to see Americans have more children, they should probably ignore Mr. Putin's advice, and they should definitely ignore Mr. Gibson's advice. They should look at ways of making parenting more rewarding, and less burdensome, in social as well as economic terms.
|
| |
Parents, exhibitionist young people differ on NSA spying |
| (It s interesting to see how the newspaper editors position young people who object to NSA spying, as exhibitionists - instead of, more accurately, referencing ... |
(It's interesting to see how the newspaper editors position young people who object to NSA spying, as exhibitionists - instead of, more accurately, referencing the people who are spying on the rest of us ... the people whom have sought out, and accepted, employment, where they, as a matter of course, eavesdrop upon individuals, at the orders of others, without even inquiring as to why they have been ordered to do so ... as peeping toms.)
(Is it really exhibitionism, though? The fact is, society has never been healthier. Women who enjoy having men stare at their breasts and who enjoy sharing the beauty of their body with others, can do so, in the privacy of their own home. Men who enjoy staring at women can do so, without having to subject themselves to the seedy and exploitive atmosphere of publically available [or not available, as the case may be] adult entertainments. THERE IS NO EXPLOITATION - because there is no money involved.)
(Perhaps this is what bothers some people, the most - their opportunity to cash in on the loneliness of others has been diminished ... and they, resenting the loss of income, have attempted to claim the moral high ground.)
sfgate.com
Generation gap
Parents, exhibitionist young people differ on NSA spying
Justin Berton, Chronicle Staff Writer
Saturday, May 20, 2006
Over the past 12 years, Melissa Gira has cultivated a daily audience of 4,000 strangers, whom she lets watch her most intimate moments on her Web site. They have watched her wake up and recall her dreams, and they have watched her suffer through breakups. In more recent years, some have paid hourly fees to watch her perform "digital sex."
Gira, a.k.a. m. Shakti, was one of the first "Web cam girls" who, using a real-time camera, intentionally exposed the details of her life online 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
"I shared secrets there I wouldn't share with anyone else," Gira said. "Things I said only to therapists, best friends."
Yet when the 28-year-old San Francisco resident learned last week, along with millions of Americans, that the National Security Agency had collected the telephone records of unsuspecting citizens, it crossed Gira's privacy line.
Although atypical in her choices of hobby and profession, Gira is typical of many in her generation when it comes to privacy concerns. On the one hand, she and millions of citizens under 30 are actively engaging in online exhibitionism without fear of consequences. On the other hand, they seem more concerned than their parents about government eavesdropping in the name of U.S. security.
According to a national Pew Research Center Poll conducted in January, 56 percent of 18- to-29-year-olds surveyed said the government's policy of eavesdropping on suspected terrorists' phone calls and e-mails before obtaining court permission was generally wrong, while 53 percent of those 50 to 64 years old said it was the right thing to do.
The response of the younger generation might seem contradictory -- how can you reveal your intimacies to total strangers online and then worry about some spook in Langley, Va., tracking or listening to your phone calls? But it says a lot about young Americans' confidence in controlling new technology, as well as their lack of confidence in their government's use of it.
"Young people are certainly more comfortable with and more accepting of technology," said Scott Keeter, director of survey research of the Pew Research Center in Washington, an independent opinion research group. "But we see a pattern -- across several different questions asked in our surveys -- that indicates young people are more skeptical of the government's efforts in the use of these tools to combat terrorism."
In Northern California, that dual sentiment was echoed last week by a dozen members of Generation Y interviewed by The Chronicle. Sonoma State University senior Nadir Vissanjy, 21, president of the campus's Associated Students Inc., said the government should not mistake his personal openness online as an invitation to mine for private information.
"That's a thin line between civil liberties and physical and national security that our government has crossed," Vissanjy said. "Our generation is open with things such as MySpace and Facebook and these other networks, so it seems like they're OK with the public knowing what you're doing -- but there are some things that the government should not intrude on, such as private calls, text messaging and e-mails."
Kristopher Tate, an 18-year-old Palo Alto resident who started www.zooomr.com, a site where users share photos from around the world, said the risk of exposing one's personal information was worth the payoff for connecting with the like-minded.
"We're willing to give up some of our privacy to connect with people easier," Tate said. "The realization that people can find you online isn't that threatening to this generation. But there's a difference between giving up information like what's on MySpace and the government listening to a phone conversation."
But if Gen Y-ers truly are more concerned about phone tapping than their parents, their parents don't see much evidence of the outrage. Danelle Morton, 50, an Oakland author, said she was infuriated when she learned about the NSA's actions. As she drove her 16-year-old daughter, Marissa Spoer, to school last week, she ranted at length while her daughter merely replied, "Oh, wow," to the NSA reports and was more intrigued by a newspaper article about vagrants rousted from Telegraph Avenue in Berkeley.
Eventually, Morton telephoned her Congressional representatives as well as her phone company to protest. It worries Morton that her daughter's generation appears oblivious to the seriousness of the incursions.
"If their parents would be able to read their text messages, then they'd be upset," she said.
Students may appear blasé this time of year, said Arjuna Sayyed, 24, president of the student body at City College of San Francisco, because they are wrapped up in their studies. But she believes an underlying skepticism exists.
"In general, students distrust the government -- maybe not to the point where they're out actively campaigning against it, but definitely, in the classroom, teachers are referencing the mistakes and the backward tactics of our government, and people laugh and agree, for the most part,'' Sayyed said.
Adrian Covert, 22, president of the Political Science Student Association of San Francisco State University, theorized that his peers are unafraid of successful government intrusion in their communications because young people already have been exposed to a case of digital monitoring that had no tangible effect on their lives.
"When the music industry prosecuted people for downloading music, parents were genuinely worried about this,'' Covert said. "They warned their kids against it, but nobody in my generation stopped doing it. There were millions of people doing it, and the fact that there were 200 subpoenas issued didn't worry us."
It may not have worried Covert's peers, but researchers and privacy experts warn that it is illogical to be blasé about incursions of one kind of privacy and adamant about the protection of another. In fact, the disconnect might cause an erosion of privacy.
"Teens today grow up in a state of constant surveillance where there is no privacy," said Danah Boyd, a Ph.D candidate at UC Berkeley's School of Information, who studies youth culture and online communities. "So they can't really have an idea of it being lost. The risk of the government or a corporation coming in and looking at their MySpace site is beyond their consideration."
Paul Saffo, director of the Institute for the Future, a Palo Alto think tank, shared Boyd's concern.
"What worries me about the MySpace generation is that they haven't considered the consequences of inaccurate information on the Web or in an e-mail -- or just one digit off on a phone number," said Saffo.
"This generation is comfortable being watched, but they will be sadder and wiser when they realize the watcher is imperfect."
But for Gira, the Web cam entrepreneur, the NSA's recent action has only reinforced the way she distinguishes between different forms of privacy.
"I'm fine with sharing really intense personal experiences when I have control of that flow of information," Gira said. "What I get concerned about is when that control gets compromised without my consent."
|
| |
RE: The Bhagavad Gita - A question for Hindus |
| It depends upon who you ask.. I mean if you ask a deeply religious person who seem to have taken everything in a literal sense, then he will ofcourse tell ... |
It depends upon who you ask.. I mean if you ask a deeply religious person who seem to have taken everything in a literal sense, then he will ofcourse tell you the whole Hindu mythological epic "Marabharata" as to how "Arjun" had a consience attack during the start of a war where he may have to kill his own cousin brothers and uncles and how "krishna" gave him this "lecture" on the battlefield about "An Individual's duty" (which is now known as Bhagwat Gita) to make him understand how this is a Just war and he should look at the "bigger picture" and perform his duty.
But If you ask someone like me who was born and raised in India but is a lil skceptical about all the mythologies and just believe in the essence and not the literal part of it then... I would say, it sure is part of a centuries old literature of a highly civilized and advanced society. This immensely rich literature written in beautiful verses and poems reflects the culture of a intellectually advanced society which was based upon peace and justice.
A society which flourished so much that it attracted all the plunderers from all over the world (Romans, mongols and finally British) who then looted all the wealth and devestated the centuaries old Indus civilization..
But that's just me..
|
| |
5/26-6/2: SF Bay Area Book and Author Events |
| San Francisco Bay AreaLiterary Arts NewsletterFor the Week of May 26 to June 2, 2006 Calendar of Local Literary EventsCompiled by SoMa Literary Reviewwww.somalit.com ... |
San Francisco Bay
Area
Literary Arts Newsletter
For the Week of May
26 to June 2, 2006
Calendar of Local Literary
Events
Compiled by SoMa Literary
Review
www.somalit.com |
 Editor's Note: Is the
newsletter a great resource for you? Then pass the word!
Subscription is free
at www.somalit.com
---Kemble Scott, Editor
This week...
-CALVIN
TRILLIN
-LATE, LATE SHOW host CRAIG FERGUSON
-LEE CHILD brings his latest
Jack Reacher thriller
-CURTIS SITTENFELD
FRIDAY, MAY 26, 2006
BAYCON, THE SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA
REGIONAL SCIENCE FICTION & FANTASY CONVENTION. Runs continuously, 24 hours a
day, from the afternoon of Friday, May 26th through Monday, May 29th. $70
membership. Doubletree Hotel, 2050 Gateway Place, San Jose. (408) 453-4000.
SUSAN SHREVE, author of A STUDENT OF LIVING THINGS. Fri., May 26, 6:00
p.m. Book Passage, One Ferry Plaza, San Francisco. (415) 835-1020.
Poetry reading with KELLY HOLT and BEN MAZER. Friday, May 26, 6:00 pm @
Café Royale, 800 Post (at Leavenworth), San Francisco. 415 441-4099
MUTABARUKA, author of THE NEXT POEMS. Friday, May 26, 6:30 p.m. Marcus
Books, 3900 Martin Luther King Jr. Way, Oakland. (510) 652-2344.
RIPE
FRUIT SCHOOL OF CREATIVE WRITING with readings by SUZANNA TRUBIN, JUDY NODDIN,
CHRIS WEST, ROBIN BENNETT, PETER EMMERICH, JULIE BENBOW, JUDY RADIN, TIFFANY
BAUGUESS and JAIME BOUST. Friday, May 26, 7:00 PM. Modern Times Bookstore, 888
Valencia Street, San Francisco. 415-282-9246.
Vista Community College
celebrates the release of MILVIA STREET 2006, an art and literary journal. This
year marks the last time Milvia Street will be published under the moniker
Vista. Next month the college changes its name to Berkeley City College. Friday,
May 26, 7-9 pm. Berkeley Public Library, 2090 Kittredge St., Berkeley. (510)
981-6100.
|
ROBERT
JENSEN
talks about
THE HEART OF WHITENESS:
CONFRONTING RACE,
RACISM AND WHITE PRIVILEGE
Friday, May 26, 7:00 p.m.
Book
Passage
51 Tamal Vista Boulevard
Corte
Madera
415.927.0960
JENNY KURZWEIL, author of FIELDS THAT
DREAM: A JOURNEY TO THE ROOTS OF OUR FOOD. Friday, May 26, 7:30 PM at Cody’s
Telegraph Avenue, 2454 Telegraph Avenue, Berkeley. 510-845-7852.
INES
VILLAFANE-LEON, author of A STORY FOR ALL SEASONS. May 26, 7:30 PM. Barnes &
Noble Booksellers, 3600 Stevens Creek Blvd, San Jose. 408-984-3495.
SATURDAY, MAY 27, 2006
THE MUSIC OF IT - a
workshop on sound in poetry and prose taught by SUSAN GRIFFIN. Saturday, May 27,
10:30 am until 5:00 pm. $175-250 (sliding scale). Reservations: 510 528 9296 or
ninong@comcast.net.
TONY ROBLES celebrates the release of LAKAS AND THE
MAKIBAKA HOTEL. Saturday, May 27th, 11 am. City Lights Bookstore, 261 Columbus
Ave., San Francisco. (415) 362-8193.
SUSAN RICHARDS SHREVE, author of A
STUDENT OF LIVING THINGS. Sat., May 27th at 2:00 PM. "M" is for Mystery...and
More, 86 East Third Ave., San Mateo. (650) 401-8077.
THE SIT-DOWN
READERS’ THEATRE presents Heartbreak House - Come read a part in George Bernard
Shaw's play that grew out of the playwright's anger and despair over World War
I. 27 MAY, SATURDAY, 2:00 p.m. North Beach Branch Library, 2000 Mason Street (at
Columbus), San Francisco. (415) 355-5626. Funded by Friends of the San Francisco
Public Library.
SAN FRANCISCO RUSSIAN BIBLIOPHILES - Book discussion in
Russian. 27 MAY, SATURDAY, 2:00 - 4:00 p.m. Main Library, Lower Level,
Latino/Hispanic Community Meeting Room, 100 Larkin Street (at Grove), San
Francisco. (415) 557-4400.
CATHERINE FULDE, author of QUICK AND EASY
ITALIAN. May 27, 2:30 PM. Barnes & Noble Booksellers Eastridge Mall, 2200
Eastridge Loop Space 1420, San Jose. 408-270-9470.
SUNDAY,
MAY 28, 2006
TWO AUTHOR EVENT
ROBERT SAN SOUCI, author of
ZIGZAG
&
STEFAN CZERNECKI, author of LILLIPUT 5357. Sun. May 28, 11:00
a.m. Book Passage, One Ferry Plaza, San Francisco. (415) 835-1020.
MARC
KAPLAN, author of OVER THE EDGE. Sun., May 28th at 2:00 PM. "M" is for
Mystery...and More, 86 East Third Ave., San Mateo. (650) 401-8077.
SUNDAY AT CAFE PRAGUE READING SERIES featuring JUSTIN DESMANGLES.
Followed by an open mike hosted by MARK SCHWARTZ. May 28, 4 - 5:30 p.m. Cafe
Prague, 584 Pacific Ave. (& Kearney), San Francisco. (415) 905-8837.
WALKER BRENTS discusses the vision of Vincent Van Gogh with insights
drawn from his letters. Sunday, May 28, 4:30 pm. Bird & Beckett Books &
Records, 2788 Diamond Street (at Chenery), San Francisco. (415) 586-3733.
POETRY FLASH AT CODY’S featuring JANE HIRSHFIELD & KAY RYAN. $2
donation. Sunday, May 28, 7:30 PM at Cody’s Telegraph Avenue, 2454 Telegraph
Avenue, Berkeley. 510-845-7852.
MONDAY, MAY 29,
2006
Poets BILL MERCER and CLARA HSU read their work with
shakuhachi accompaniment. Monday, May 29, 7:30 pm. Bird & Beckett Books
& Records, 2788 Diamond Street (at Chenery), San Francisco. (415) 586-3733.
TUESDAY, MAY 30, 1006
LEE CHILD, author of
THE HARD WAY, will drop by sometime on Tuesday, May 30th. "M" is for
Mystery...and More, 86 East Third Ave., San Mateo. (650) 401-8077.
LEE
CHILD, author of THE HARD WAY. Tuesday, May 30th @ 12:30. Stacey's Bookstore,
581 Market Street, San Francisco. 415.421.4687.
DEREK LEEBAERT discusses
TO DARE AND TO CONQUER: SPECIAL OPERATIONS AND THE DESTINY OF NATIONS, FROM
ACHILLES TO AL QAEDA. Leebaert uncovers the stories of special forces, from
those glorified in ancient myths to today’s Delta Force, introducing readers to
history’s most high-stakes show downs. Tues., May 30, 1:00 p.m. Book Passage, 51
Tamal Vista Boulevard, Corte Madera. 415.927.0960.
SPANISH BOOK
GROUP/CÍRCULO DE LECTORES DE LITERATURA EN ESPAÑOL. This month the book group is
reading and discussing LOS ROJOS DE ULTRAMAR by Jordi Soler. Tuesday, May 30,
7:00 PM. Modern Times Bookstore, 888 Valencia Street, San Francisco.
415-282-9246.
MOLLIE KATZEN, co-author of EAT, DRINK, AND WEIGH LESS.
Tuesday, May 30 at 7 PM. A Clean Well-Lighted Place for Books, Opera Plaza, 601
Van Ness Ave, San Francisco. 415.441.6670.
LEE CHILD reads from THE HARD
WAY. Tues., May 30, 7:00 p.m. Book Passage, 51 Tamal Vista Boulevard, Corte
Madera. 415.927.0960.
SASHA ABRAMSKY, author of CONNED: HOW MILLIONS
WENT TO PRISON, LOST THE VOTE, AND HELPED SEND GEORGE W. BUSH TO THE WHITE
HOUSE. Tuesday, May 30 at 7:30pm. Capitola Book Café, 1475 41st Ave, Capitola.
831.462.4415.
TERRI JENTZ, author of STRANGE PIECE OF PARADISE. TUESDAY,
MAY 30, 7:30 PM at Cody’s Telegraph Avenue, 2454 Telegraph Avenue, Berkeley.
510-845-7852.
JOY GARDNER, author of VIBRATIONAL HEALING THROUGH THE
CHAKRAS WITH LIGHT, COLOR, SOUND, CRYSTALS AND AROMATHERAPY. Tuesday, May 30th,
7:30 p.m. Readers’ Books, 130 E. Napa Street, Sonoma. 707-939-1779.
WEDNESDAY, MAY 31, 2006
|
Local author CORNELIA
READ
reads from her debut novel
A FIELD OF
DARKNESS
Wednesday, May 31st @ 12:30
Stacey's Bookstore
581 Market
Street
San Francisco
415.421.4687
LISA UNGER, author
BEAUTIFUL LIES. May 31, 1:00 PM. Signing only. "M" is for Mystery...and More, 86
East Third Ave., San Mateo. (650) 401-8077.
RINCON LITERARIO – Book
discussion in Spanish. 31 MAY, WEDNESDAY, 6:00 – 7:30 p.m. Main Library, Third
Floor Conference Room, 100 Larkin Street (at Grove), San Francisco. (415)
557-4400.
JOHN O'CONNOR, author of A G-MAN'S LIFE. Wednesday, May 31,
6:00 p.m. Check-in. 6:30 p.m. Program. A Commonwealth Club Event. New Veterans
Memorial Hall, 3780 Mt. Diablo Blvd., Lafayette. $15 for Members, $25 for
Non-members. (415) 597-6700.
PROFESSOR JOEL BEININ, author of THE
STRUGGLE FOR SOVEREIGNTY: PALESTINE & ISRAEL, 1993-2005. May 31, 6:00 p.m.
Stanford Bookstore, 519 Lasuen Mall, Stanford. (650) 329-1217.
JOSEPH
VOLPE talks about THE TOUGHEST SHOW ON EARTH: MY RISE AND REIGN AT THE
METROPOLITAN OPERA. Wed., May 31, 6:30 p.m. Book Passage, One Ferry Plaza, San
Francisco. (415) 835-1020.
TOM DEMOTT, author of INTO THE HEARTS OF THE
AMAZONS: IN SEARCH OF A MODERN MATRIARCHY, discusses the matriarchal culture of
the Zapotec people at 7:00 p.m. Wednesday, May 31 at Get Lost Travel Books, 1825
Market St., San Francisco. (415) 437-0529.
TERRI JENTZ discusses STRANGE
PIECE OF PARADISE. Wed., May 31, 7:00 p.m. Book Passage, Events Room, 51 Tamal
Vista Boulevard, Corte Madera. 415.927.0960.
MICHAEL POLLAN, author of
THE OMNIVORE'S DILEMMA. Wednesday, May 31 at 7 PM. A Clean Well-Lighted Place
for Books, Opera Plaza, 601 Van Ness Ave, San Francisco. 415.441.6670.
LISA UNGER reads from her thriller BEAUTIFUL LIES. Wed., May 31, 7:00
p.m. Book Passage II, Gallery, 51 Tamal Vista Boulevard, Corte Madera.
415.927.0960.
MAXINE ROSE SCHUR, author of PLACES IN TIME: REFLECTIONS
ON A JOURNEY. Wednesday, May 31st @ 7:30 pm. Black Oak Books, 1491 Shattuck
Avenue, Berkeley. (510) 486-0698.
LEE CHILD, author of THE HARD WAY: A
JACK REACHER NOVEL. Wednesday, May 31 at 7:30pm. Capitola Book Café, 1475 41st
Ave, Capitola. 831.462.4415.
|
SASHA ABRAMSKY
author
of
CONNED: HOW MILLIONS WENT TO PRISON,
LOST THE VOTE, AND HELPED
SEND
GEORGE W. BUSH TO THE WHITE HOUSE
More than four million
Americans, mainly poor, black, and Latino, have lost the right to vote. The
reason? Revived felony disenfranchisement laws that came of age in the
post–Civil War segregationist South.
Wednesday, May 31, 7:30 PM
Modern
Times Bookstore
888 Valencia Street
San Francisco.
415-282-9246
SCOTT ANDERSON, author of MOONLIGHT HOTEL. Wednesday,
May 31, 7:30 PM at Cody’s Telegraph Avenue, 2454 Telegraph Avenue, Berkeley.
510-845-7852.
New York Times bestselling author of PREP, CURTIS
SITTENFELD, presents her new book, THE MAN OF MY DREAMS, a coming-of-age novel
about a young woman's fantasies of family and romance colliding with the
realities of adult life. Wednesday, May 31, 7:30 pm. Books Inc. in Palo Alto,
Stanford Shopping Center, Palo Alto. 650-321-0600.
THURSDAY, JUNE 1, 2006
TWO AUTHOR
EVENT
LISA UNGER, author of BEAUTIFUL LIES
&
DENISE HAMILTON,
author of PRISONER OF MEMORY. Thursday, June 1st @ 12:30. Stacey's Bookstore,
581 Market Street, San Francisco. 415.421.4687.
Show your support for
authors!
Make it your goal this week to pass along the newsletter to at
least two other book lovers, so they too can become informed about local
literary events.
Subscription is free at www.somalit.com.
JOSEPH FINDER, author of
KILLER INSTINCT. Signing only. Thurs., June 1st at 12:30 PM. "M" is for
Mystery...and More, 86 East Third Ave., San Mateo. (650) 401-8077.
JOSEPH FINDER, author of KILLER INSTINCT. Thursday, June 1st @ 5:30 pm.
The Commonwealth Club, 595 Market Street, 2nd Floor, San Francisco. Check in is
at 5:30 pm. $8 for members and $15 for non-members. 415-597-6705. Co-sponsored
by Stacey's.
MILO & THUY SINDELL, authors of SINK OR SWIM: NEW JOB.
NEW BOSS. 12 WEEKS TO GET IT RIGHT. June 1, 6:00 p.m. Stanford Bookstore, 519
Lasuen Mall, Stanford. (650) 329-1217.
|
MICHAEL
POLLAN
bestselling author of THE BOTANY OF DESIRE
discusses his latest
book
THE OMNIVORE'S DILEMMA
As part of this special event,
a
special three-course dinner will be served for $20
Reservations: (925)
837-7337
Thursday, 1 June, 7 PM
Rakestraw Books
409 Railroad Avenue,
Danville
General manager of The Metropolitan Opera JOSEPH VOLPE,
author of THE TOUGHEST SHOW ON EARTH. Thursday, June 1 at 7 PM. A Clean
Well-Lighted Place for Books, Opera Plaza, 601 Van Ness Ave, San Francisco.
415.441.6670.
TERRI JENTZ, author of STRANGE PIECE OF PARADISE, an
account of Terri's investigation into the mystery of her near murder. Thursday,
June 1, 7:00pm. Modern Times Bookstore, 888 Valencia Street, San Francisco.
415-282-9246.
LAURIE R. KING, author of THE ART OF DETECTION. Thursday,
June 1, 7:00 PM. "M" is for Mystery...and More, 86 East Third Ave., San Mateo.
(650) 401-8077.
Author of the bestselling novel PAY IT FORWARD,
CATHERINE RYAN HYDE reads from her latest book, LOVE IN THE PRESENT TENSE. June
1, 7:00 PM. Borders San Rafael, 588 Francisco Blvd, West, San Rafael.
415.454.1400.
WORD BEAT READING SERIES. Featured Readers: BUFORD BUNTIN
& PRISCILLA CARETTO. Followed by an open mike hosted by DEBRA GRACE KHATTAB
& JEREMY MORRIS SIEGEL. Thursday, June 1, 7 p.m. Mediterraneum Caffe, 2475
Telegraph Ave. (near Dwight Way), Berkeley. (510) 549-1128.
"The Coming
Media Monopoly: Concentration of Press Ownership and Its Effects on Democracy,"
a panel discussion presented by the Society of Professional Journalists and
Media Alliance. Featuring LINDA FOLEY, president of The Newspaper Guild, TIM
REDMOND, editor of the SAN FRANCISCO BAY GUARDIAN, STEPHEN BUEL, editor of the
EAST BAY EXPRESS and SANDY CLOSE, founder and director of New America Media.
Moderated by ERNA SMITH, professor of journalism, San Francisco State
University. Thursday, June 1, at 7 p.m. - Reception at 6:30 p.m. LGBT Community
Center, 1800 Market St., San Francisco. 510-832-9000. $5 (FREE for members of
SPJ and Media Alliance).
LORENA BATHEY discusses her memoir HAPPY
BEGINNINGS. Bay Books San Ramon, 2415 San Ramon Valley Blvd. Thursday, June 1, 7
pm. 925-855-1524.
BEN FONG-TORRES, author of BECOMING ALMOST FAMOUS: MY
BACK PAGES IN MUSIC, WRITING, AND LIFE, a collection of favorite articles the
pioneering music writer. Thursday, June 1st at 7 pm. The Booksmith, 1644 Haight
Street, San Francisco. 415-863-8688.
SCOTT ANDERSON, author of MOONLIGHT
HOTEL. Thursday, June 1 at 7:30pm. Capitola Book Café, 1475 41st Ave, Capitola.
831.462.4415.
CALVIN TRILLIN reads from his latest book, A HECKUVA JOB:
MORE OF THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION IN RHYME, his look at the current Bush
Administration, following on the success of his 2004 bestseller, OBLIVIOUSLY ON
HE SAILS. Thursday, June 1, 7:30 p.m. Books Inc. in Mountain View, 301 Castro
St, Mtn View, 650-428-1234.
JOE FINDER reads from KILLER INSTINCT.
Thurs., June 1, 7:30 p.m. Book Passage, 51 Tamal Vista Boulevard, Corte Madera.
415.927.0960.
SCOTT ANDERSON, author of MOONLIGHT HOTEL. Thursday, June
1 at 7:30pm. Capitola Book Café 1475 41st Ave., Capitola. 831.462.4415.
SUSAN SWARTZ reads from THE JUICY TOMATOES GUIDE TO RIPE LIVING AFTER
50, in which women writers who are strong, sexy, and smart, celebrate their age
instead of lying about it. Thursday, June 1, 7:30 p.m. Books Inc. in Alameda,
1344 Park St, Alameda, 510-522-2226.
PERFORMANCE WRITING SERIES
featuring ELENI STECOPOULOS & RODRIGO TOSCANO. Thursday, June 1, 8pm. $8 New
Langton Arts, 1246 Folsom Street, San Francisco. (415) 626-5416.
LATE,
LATE SHOW host CRAIG FERGUSON reads from his new novel BETWEEN THE BRIDGE AND
THE RIVER. Thursday June 1, 8pm. Edinburgh Castle Pub, 950 Geary Street, San
Francisco. 415.885.4074.
FRIDAY, JUNE 2, 2006
CBS’s The Late Late Show host CRAIG FERGUSON, author of BETWEEN THE
BRIDGE AND THE RIVER, a funny first novel, with an eclectic cast of characters
that includes Carl Jung, Fatty Arbuckle, Virgil and Socrates. Friday, June 2nd @
12:30. Stacey's, 581 Market Street, San Francisco. 415.421.4687.
|
LAURIE R.
KING
author of
THE ART OF DETECTION
In this novel, San
Francisco homicide detective Kate Martinelli crosses paths with Sherlock Holmes.
Saturday, June 2 at 2:30pm
Capitola Book Café
1475 41st Ave,
Capitola
831.462.4415
SUSAN CUMMINS MILLER reads from
QUARRY. Friday, June 2 at 5:00 PM. "M" is for Mystery...and More, 86 East Third
Ave., San Mateo. (650) 401-8077.
BEN FONG-TORRES discusses BECOMING
ALMOST FAMOUS: MY BACK PAGES IN MUSIC, WRITING, AND LIFE. This collection of
favorite articles by seminal rock journalist Fong-Torres features music and
pop-culture piece on Paul McCartney, groupies of the 80s, Al Green, the Summer
of Love, the Rolling Stones, Frank Sinatra, Cheech and Chong, and Steve Martin
among others. Fri., June 2, 7:00 p.m. Book Passage, 51 Tamal Vista Boulevard,
Corte Madera. 415.927.0960.
JANE JUSKA, author of UNACCOMPANIED WOMEN:
LATE-LIFE ADVENTURES IN LOVE, SEX, AND REAL ESTATE. Friday, June 2, 7:00 PM at
Cody’s, 1730 Fourth Street, Berkeley. 510-559-9500.
CALVIN TRILLIN,
author of A HECKUVA JOB. Friday, June 2 at 7 PM. A Clean Well-Lighted Place for
Books, Opera Plaza, 601 Van Ness Ave, San Francisco. 415.441.6670.
HORSE
CRAZY: WOMEN AND THE HORSES THEY LOVE. Four Bay Area writers will read their
pieces from an anthology of stories about the relationships between women and
horses, both real and imagined. ANITA LLEWELLYN, the editor, is the author of
three nonfiction books. Plus writers STEPHANIE LOSEE, ARIANA STROZZI and KAY
GEORGE. Friday, June 2nd, 7:30 pm. Point Reyes Books, 11315 State Route 1, Point
Reyes Station, CA. 415.663.1542.
Local author SHON MECKFESSEL reads from
his book wrote SUFFLED HOW IT GUSH: A NORTH AMERICAN ANARCHIST IN THE BALKANS.
Friday, June 2nd at 7:30pm. The Avid Reader Bookstore, 617 Second St., Davis.
(530) 758-4040.
SPIKE GILLESPIE, author of PISSED OFF: ON WOMEN AND
ANGER. Friday, June 2, 7:30 PM at Cody’s, 2454 Telegraph Avenue, Berkeley.
510-845-7852.
EDUARDO GALEANO, author of VOICES OF TIME: A LIFE IN
STORIES. Friday, June 2, 7:30 PM, First Congregational Church of Oakland, 2501
Harrison at 27th Street, Oakland. Tickets $10 in advance from Cody’s.
510-845-7852. $12 at door.
Every effort is made
to make sure listings are accurate and up-to-date at time of publication.
Logistical problems and illnesses can cause cancellations. We recommend you call
ahead of time to confirm an event is still scheduled.
|
About SoMa Literary
Review
Since 1999, SoMa Literary Review has been a platform for the work
of both new and established Bay Area writers. Submissions are always welcome.
Please visit www.somalit.com and read our submission guidelines.
About the San Francisco Bay Area Literary Arts Newsletter
Our goal
with the SoMa Literary Review San Francisco Bay Area Literary Arts Newsletter is
to further encourage the remarkable sense of community that exists in the local
literature scene. We want to eliminate the need for people to hunt down
information about what's happening with author appearances and book events. By
making such knowledge as easy as opening a single e-mail each Friday, we hope
even more people will participate.
If you have a literary event you would like included in the calendar, please
send your notice to: editor@somalit.com. Be sure to include date, location and
time details, plus a contact phone number to allow those interested to confirm
the event. If there is an admission fee for your event, please note that in
your listing. Otherwise, it will be assumed your event is free and open to the
public.
Posting events in the SoMa Literary Review Bay Area Literary Arts Calendar is
free.
Subscribing to the SoMa Literary Review Bay Area Literary Arts Calendar is
free. E-mail addresses and information about subscribers are kept
confidential and not shared or sold.
|
Editor: Kemble Scott
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ |
|
| |
And speaking of Racism |
| I am the author of America.........Mexican or a melting pot? Like every idiot before me I called myself a "racist". I guess I m a product of our society, ... |
I am the author of America.........Mexican or a melting pot?
Like every idiot before me I called myself a "racist". I guess I'm a product of our society, brainwashed and a sheep of our modern educational system. A radio and news addict led to beleive that every time I hear or see something relating to or involving an issue regarding two or more different races,it automatically gets pegged a "racist" issue. Had I ever actually looked up the word? No. Does it matter since the word had been redefined to mean other than what it really means? DO YOU KNOW WHAT IT MEANS? Websters dictonary defines racism as the notion that one's own ethnic stock is superior. This stems from prejudice which is a pre conceived notion formed before hand without full knowledge of the facts. Irrational hatered or suspicion of a race.
I felt so much better knowing how I felt or the opinions I expressed wern't racist. I don't feel superior. I like the Mexican people. I like all races of people. I probably should be a racist considering when I moved to my little town in '71 and attended our public schools I was regulary picked on and punched by Mexicans and even chased by a a chain wielding Mexican and had no idea why. Hell,I had never even seen a Mexican before. Maybe he was the racist.......but then maybe he wasn't, only white people are. I was also assaulted by Black kids. Yes,they called themselves black in the 70's so don't get all twisted out of shape. I saw my first black kid when I moved here. Boy, was he scary coming at me! I sure as hell didn't know what his problem was. Maybe he didn't like white(they called us Honkys)kids......but maybe that's my prejudice popping up and I need to be senitive of their feelings while I nurse my fat lip. Anybody getting the point?
Maybe we are all just letting things get out of hand aren't we? Was the Mexican with the chain racist? Was the black racist? Were the black riots that destroyed Korean business during the Rodney King trials racist? When one Mexican gang member kills another Mexican gang member who was flying his "color" in the wrong place a form of racism? When a lighter race of Polynesians were considered superior to a darker race living on the same damn little Island racism? Isn't this really what racism is?
Is racism wanting "Language,culture and borders"? Is racism wanting all of us to communicate in a common language so we can better understand each other? Is racism wanting to preserve our American way of life? Yes, America does have a culture. It's not black, Mexican or Korean it's all of the above and that is what makes America great. What makes it great is those people who truely want to be American bring there culture here but become American. We don't become them. Mexico is Mexican. Korea is Korean. Africa is........well, not a nice place for millions, but it is what it is and thank God we are who we are. We are The United States,not the divided states. We are one nation not a hundred. The only way to survive as a nation is to act like one and not cater to others.
|
| |
The rape charge as weapon |
| www.boston.comThe rape charge as weaponBy Cathy Young | May 1, 2006THE NOTORIOUS case of alleged rape at Duke University has an explosive mix of elements: ... |
www.boston.com
The rape charge as weapon
By Cathy Young | May 1, 2006
THE NOTORIOUS case of alleged rape at Duke University has an explosive mix of elements: gender, race, class, and charges of sexual violence. Three members of the school's lacrosse team, privileged young white men, are accused of sexually assaulting a stripper who is African-American.
The facts of the case remain murky. According to media reports, medical evidence seems to support the woman's claim of sexual assault, but no DNA match to any team members has been found, and two of the accused may have an alibi. The police report suggests that the woman was initially picked up when heavily intoxicated. The other exotic dancer who was on the scene initially disputed the alleged victim's claims but then changed her story somewhat, and apparently made inquiries about profiting from her role in the case.
In the current trial by media, charges of a rush to judgment abound. Women's advocates and many others claim that the alleged victim is being smeared as a slut by a sexist culture which holds that an ''unchaste" woman who is raped must have been ''asking for it." (Radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh charmingly referred to charges that lacrosse team members had ''raped some hos.")
Meanwhile, some say that the quick assumption that the players are guilty reflects antimale prejudice. Writes columnist Kathleen Parker, ''Reaction to Duke's sad chapter is but the inevitable full flowering of the antimale seeds planted a generation ago. Thus, we need little prompting to assume that where there's a guy, there's a potential rapist."
Feminism has achieved real and important progress in the treatment of sexual assault victims. A couple of generations ago, a stripper at a party with athletes would have been viewed by many as fair game. That this is no longer the case surely makes us a more decent society.
But even some people who applaud this change believe that in some cases, the pendulum has swung too far. Many feminists seem to think that in sexual assault cases the presumption of innocence should not apply. Appearing on the Fox News show ''The O'Reilly Factor," Monika Johnson-Hostler of the North Carolina Coalition Against Sexual Assault declared that her role was ''to support a woman or any victim that comes forward to say that they were sexually assaulted."
To O'Reilly's question, ''Even if they weren't?" Johnson-Hostler replied, ''I can't say that I've come across one that wasn't." Feminist pundits discussing this case, such as Wendy Murphy of the New England School of Law, exude an overwhelming presumption of guilt.
In some cases, activists have even protested what they believe is excessive coverage of false accusations of rape and innocently accused men.
False charges do exist. FBI statistics show that about 9 percent of rape reports are ''unfounded" -- dismissed without charges being filed. This usually happens when the accuser recants or when her story is not just unsupported but contradicted by evidence. Some studies, including one by pioneering date rape researcher Eugene Kanin, put the rate of false accusations at one in four or even higher.
The results can be devastating. In 1996, Los Angeles police officer Harris Scott Mintz was accused of rape by a woman in the neighborhood he patrolled, and then by his own wife as well. At a pretrial hearing, the judge pronounced that he had no doubt about Mintz's guilt. Then, his wife admitted that she made up the charge because she was angry at her husband for getting in trouble with the law; subsequently, Mintz's attorneys uncovered evidence that the first accuser had told an ex-roommate she had concocted the rape charge in order to sue the county and that she had tried a similar hoax before. By the time the case collapsed, Mintz had spent five months in jail.
To recognize that some women wrongly accuse men of rape is not antifemale, any more than recognizing that some men rape women is antimale. Is it so unreasonable to think that a uniquely damaging charge will be used by some people as a weapon, just as others will use their muscle? Do we really believe that when women have power -- and there is power in an accusation of rape -- they are less likely to abuse it than men? As Columbia University law professor George Fletcher has written, "It is important to defend the interests of women as victims, but not to go so far as to accord women complaining of rape a presumption of honesty and objectivity."
If that's the lesson of the Duke case, then some good will have come of it after all.
Cathy Young is a contributing editor at Reason magazine. Her column appears regularly in the Globe.
|
 |
VIP service to foreigners in Kiev, Ukraine |
| Do you plan to visit Ukraine with business purposes?Are you interested in Slavonic culture and would like to get yourself acquainted with customs and traditions ... |
Do you plan to visit Ukraine with business purposes?
Are you interested in Slavonic culture and would like to get yourself acquainted with customs and traditions of Ukraine?
Have you found a loving person in Ukraine and would like to visit him/her?
Are you just tired of monotony and want to get in touch with some splendid emotions?
Do you want to be assisted in Kiev on professional level?
Licensed lawyers and experienced tour guides are at your disposal:
-hotels, apartments,
-transportation from airport "Borispil'" to apartment (hotel),
-transportation services within and outside Kiev,
-services of a personal English-speaking driver,
-sightseeing tours accompanied by charming lady guides,
-interpreting services,
-restaurant guide, nightclubs,
-shopping guide,
-language courses,
-events calendar,
-employment, work permits, residence permits,
-setting up business - legal/business investigations and more.
Let us make your visit to Ukraine unforgettable
|
| |
A Different Look at Betty Friedan's Legacy |
| (What is it about these articles, questioning feminist principles of the late 20th century, that has Craigslist s editorial staff so riled up that they ... |
(What is it about these articles, questioning feminist principles of the late 20th century, that has Craigslist's editorial staff so riled up that they are deleting them? That doesn't seem very editorial, to me. Don't they have some books they can go burn, somewhere?)
www.foxnews.com
A Different Look at Betty Friedan's Legacy
Tuesday, February 07, 2006
By Wendy McElroy
Betty Friedan (1921-2006) died last Saturday at the age of 85. Eulogies have stacked up quickly for the feminist icon:
Friedan founded modern feminism; she rescued women from the '50s; she pioneered the brave 'new woman' who now strides through society.
I disagree with those eulogies about the content of Friedan's legacy. The disagreement contains no malice; however, because Friedan is a public and now-historical figure, an accurate view of her social impact is simply necessary.
Accuracy may be especially important as the impact of her death is already being used (or abused) by various political organizations and groups to promote their agendas. For example, the press release from the National Organization for Women, which Friedan was instrumental in founding in 1966, reads like a fundraiser. At the other end of the spectrum, some "masculinist" groups "rejoice in the fact that her hateful voice is now silenced."
A starting point of consensus on Friedan is possible, even among extremes. She was a remarkable woman who deeply influenced the culture of her time. But for better or worse? -- that's where battle engages.
Some of the 'facts' and assumptions about her life advanced in the eulogies demand closer examination.
Assumption One: Friedan was an apolitical housewife who had an 'aha' moment.
The New York Times sums up its eulogy with the observation that Friedan will "be forever known as the suburban housewife who started a revolution with The Feminine Mystique," her best-selling book published in 1963.
Although The Feminine Mystique capitalized upon, and thus acknowledged, Friedan's ivy-league education, it also presented her as a basically apolitical homemaker who stumbled across political truth through viewing her own domestic circumstances. This is myth.
In his award-winning 1998 book "Betty Friedan and the Making of the Feminist Mystique: The American Left, the Cold War, and Modern Feminism," Professor Daniel Horowitz of Smith College documented Friedan's ideological roots. From her college days through to her mid-30s, Friedan was a consistent and committed Marxist. She was a veteran labor journalist and union activist/pamphleteer with extensive publishing savvy.
Rather than suddenly drawing political conclusions from her domestic experience, Friedan clearly brought prior conclusions to her experience, which she interpreted through them.
Assumption Two: Friedan was representative of American women.
"The Feminine Mystique" argued that Friedan's reported experience of being caged in the oppressive, dehumanizing role of mother and housewife was shared by millions of American women. In the book's preface, Friedan stated, "Gradually, without seeing it clearly for quite a while, I came to realize that something is very wrong with the way American women are trying to lives their lives today."
The very history of her book refutes the claim that Friedan's experiences were representative.
As part of her 15th reunion at Smith College, Friedan conducted a survey of graduates, in which she asked them about their satisfaction with their lives. The resulting article, which focused on the dissatisfaction of those who became homemakers, was widely rejected by editors. Friedan eventually expanded the article into "The Feminine Mystique."
Thus, the book reflected the subjective evaluation of an elite class of women. Indeed, Friedan employed a full-time maid to pursue her career as a writer. As Rosemarie Tong remarked in "Feminist Thought" (1998), "Friedan seemed oblivious to any other perspectives than those of white, middle-class, heterosexual, educated women who found the traditional roles of wife and mother unsatisfying."
More recent scholarship questions whether Friedan even accurately represented the domesticity of upper or middle-class white women. (See Joanne Meyerowitz's "Rewriting Postwar Women's History 1945-1960.")
Although "The Feminine Mystique" clearly inspired women who wanted more independence, this is not to say that Friedan's life was representative. In the '60s, everyone seemed to demand "more"; everyone blamed society. And men may have been equally unhappy with their role as sole provider.
Assumption Three: Friedan was a moderate within feminism.
Friedan's reputation as a moderate springs largely from her rejection of anti-male rhetoric and of lesbianism as a feminist issue. She believed both would harm feminism's mainstream appeal. Friedan's stand against "the bra-burning, anti-man, politics-of-orgasm school" led other prominent feminists like Susan Brownmiller to denounce her. But neither her rejection of lesbianism nor the criticism of colleagues makes Friedan moderate.
"The Feminine Mystique" does not contain the Marxist rhetoric that characterizes later gender feminist writing but its message is no less radical. The chapter entitled "Progressive Dehumanization" draws a lengthy and explicit parallel between housewives and prisoners in Nazi concentration camps, both of whom are "walking corpses."
Friedan's assessment of the housewife may well have been instrumental in the decades-long devaluation of women who chose that option. She wrote, "Housewives are mindless and thing-hungry…Housework is peculiarly suited to the capabilities of feeble-minded girls; it can hardly use the abilities of a woman of average or normal human intelligence."
As writer and professor Carol Iannone remarked, for Friedan, "submitting to the traditional feminine role was nothing less than an embrace of nonbeing."
Assumption Four: Friedan was crucial to sparking a revolution in women's status.
Without access to parallel realities as a basis of comparison, who knows how feminism might have evolved without "The Feminine Mystique?"
I believe 'women's liberation' was an idea whose time had come. I think it sprang from a combination: the economic freedom women acquired during World War II; a post-war prosperity that encouraged personal growth; and, the unwillingness of a new generation to accept old values. A surge of feminism would have occurred with or without any particular individual.
But, as an individual, Friedan did influence the direction of that surge. For doing so, many offer eulogies. All I can say with honesty is "rest in peace."
Wendy McElroy is the editor of ifeminists.com and a research fellow for The Independent Institute in Oakland, Calif. She is the author and editor of many books and articles, including the new book, "Liberty for Women: Freedom and Feminism in the 21st Century" (Ivan R. Dee/Independent Institute, 2002). She lives with her husband in Canada.
|
| |
5/16-5/30: FRENCH NOW! Open your Language Horizon |
| by experienced native French Teacher ~A Language is not only a powerful communication tool, it is also a unique vision of the world~ Come discover and ... |
by experienced native French Teacher
~A Language is not only a powerful communication tool, it is also a unique vision of the world~
Come discover and enjoy French language and culture with other like-minded people.
Improve your pronunciation, writing and conversationnal skills to speak, read and communicate in French with ease and pleasure.
Ongoing classes:
- French Language classes: all levels, Beginners to Advanced.
- French Pronunciation workshop: a key to an easy and enjoyable communication in French.
- Theme Classes - A unique outlook on French culture and society:
French Songs: A most enjoyable way to access French language and culture through a varied selection of styles.
French Newspapers: A selection of articles to read and comment together each week.
French Cinema: a direct access to French World though major movies, from the Classics to recent Masterpieces.
Traveling in France: For a short visit or a longer stay, to have a most enjoyable experience in France.
more theme classes to come, let us know what you’d love to learn in French!
- Private Instruction also available
Teacher’s Qualifications and Experience:
-Master's degree in Cultural Studies
-French Diploma in teaching French as a Second Language
7 years of Teaching Experience in France, P8 University / Greece, University of Ioannina / California, Alliance Francaise of Santa Cruz, Alliance Francaise of San Francisco
|
| |
neocon god is Strauss!!! |
| Straussism: The Philosophy Directing The Age Of TyrannyBy Jan Allen05/22/06 "Information Clearing House" -- -- Straussism is the philosophy of the obscure ... |
Straussism: The Philosophy Directing The Age Of Tyranny
By Jan Allen
05/22/06 "Information Clearing House" -- -- Straussism is the philosophy of the obscure University Of Chicago philosophy instructor Leo Strauss.
The students of Leo Strauss left the University in search of political power; these took root in the Republican party, formed neo-conservatism and became known as Neocons
Straussism calls for tyranny -- rule from those above.
The purpose of this document is to present the principles of Straussism as a rosetta stone to give one the knowledge to decipher and translate the rhetoric and behavior of the George Bush neocon administration into some degree of coherent meaning.
Introduction:
1) A Straussian: a disciple of the philosopher Leo Strauss.
2) Leo Struass (1899-1973) was a student of philosophy in Germany and watched the Weimar Republic dissolve into chaos and then into tyranny. As a Jew, he was forced to flee Germany and he eventually ended up at the University of Chicago, where he developed a cult following from some the brightest students. For Strauss, the demise of the Weimar Republic represented a repudiation of liberal democracy. Liberalism, to Strauss, equals relativism, which necessarily leads to nihilism. Strauss longed to return to a previous, pre-liberal, pre-bourgeois era of blood and guts, of imperial domination, of authoritarian rule, of pure fascism.
These views resonated with Straussian disciples such as Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, William Kristol and Harry Jaffa. They took these ideas out of the classroom and translated them into actual political doctrine: the neoconservative manifesto of the Project for a New American Century. Straussian principles would be implemented on a global scale, and 9/11 provided the perfect pretext. Paul Wolfowitz, who attended Strauss's lectures on Plato, became the architect of the Iraq War, using hyped intelligence concerning WMD's as the "noble lie".
As a young man in Germany, Leo Strauss became infatuated with a beautiful and brilliant Jewish scholar, Hannah Arendt, whose impact on American political thought will probably be seen by future historians as greater than any other of the Weimar émigrés. Hannah Arendt spurned Strauss's advances and did not conceal her contempt for his ideas. Arendt died in 1975, but the importance of her work is just beginning to be appreciated. Her brilliant analysis, The Origins of Totalitarianism, remains the standard today, and her categories can help us understand the erosion of democracy since 9/11. Her concept of the "banality of evil" which she developed in Eichmann in Jerusalem is useful in understanding how ordinary individuals can plan and carry out acts of inhumanity.
Strauss and Arendt represent the two poles of the ideological struggle that began in the Weimar Republic and which continues even today in America.
3) So, what is Neo-conservatism (what is its relationship to Straussism and how is it related to tyranny), and how does it propose to change the world in accordance with Straussian political philosophy? 'Neo' comes from the Greek neos, which means new. And, what's neo about neo-conservatism? Well, for one thing, the old conservatism relied on tradition and history; it was cautious, slow and moderate; it went with the flow. But under the influence of Leo Strauss, the new conservatism is intoxicated with nature. The new conservatism is not slow or cautious, but active, aggressive, and reactionary in the literal sense of the term. Inspired by Strauss's hatred for liberal modernity, its goal is to turn back the clock on the liberal revolution and its achievements.
Twenty Two Characteristics Of Straussism
1) The Few Must Rule The Many
John Locke and the American founding fathers held “the natural law tradition” which holds that man possesses natural rights to life, liberty, and property and that the state is always and everywhere the greatest threat to these God-given rights. To the founders, this meant that government should be "bound by the chains" of the Constitution, to paraphrase Jefferson. If men were angels, there would be no need for government, Madison wrote in defense of the Constitution. But men are not angels, Madison continued, which is why government power must always be limited.
Leo Strauss rejected this view of natural rights in favor of Plato’s “philosopher-king” model of government; the “philosopher kings” exercise the “rule of the wise”
Straussians assign dignity to the few.
The superiority of the “ruling philosophers” is an intellectual superiority and not a moral one.
2) Virtue Is Defined By The Elite: It Is That Which Is “For The Public Good”
The elite few are to have unlimited state power who use it to pursue “virtue” with virtue being, their own vision of "the public good."
Moral virtue had no application to the really intelligent man, the philosopher. Moral virtue only existed in popular opinion, where it served the purpose of controlling the unintelligent majority.
3) The Strong Must Rule The Weak
Strauss taught: “The strong must rule the weak”; this was presented quite well in Jim Lobe's article 'The Strong Must Rule The Weak'
4) Only One Natural Right: The Right To Rule Over The Vulgar Many
Those who are fit to rule are those who realize there is no morality and that there is only one natural right – the right of the superior to rule over the inferior.
The people will not be happy to learn that there is only one natural right—the right of the superior to rule over the inferior, the master over the slave, the husband over the wife, and the wise few over the vulgar many.
For the Straussian, the people of the United States are the “vulgar many,” chumps, dupes, and ciphers to be manipulated, poked, and prodded in the direction of the “Long War,” a new Hundred Years’ War, as spelled out by Rumsfeld’s latest Quadrennial Defense Review. “A policy of perpetual war against a threatening enemy is the best way to ward off political decay. And if the enemy cannot be found, then it must be invented.”
Human beings are born neither free nor equal. The natural human condition, is not one of freedom, but of subordination.
Strauss divided the history of political thought into two camps: the ancients (like Plato) are wise and wily, whereas the moderns (like Locke and other liberals) are vulgar and foolish.
5) Justice Is Merely The Interest Of The Stronger
Strauss shares the insights of the wise Plato that justice is merely the interest of the stronger; that those in power make the rules in their own interests and call it justice.
6) “The Rule Of The Wise” is unquestionable, absolute, authoritarian, undemocratic and covert
The rule of the wise is not to be questioned: one is not to raise questions about classic values such as justice or constitutional principles; hence the rule of the wise must be unquestioned.
The rule of the wise is to be absolute, authoritarian and undemocratic: The rule of the wise cannot involve any consideration of the unwise: Leo Strauss said: “It would be equally absurd to hamper the free flow of wisdom by consideration of the unwise wishes of the unwise; hence the wise rulers ought not to be responsible to the unwise subjects;" the rule of the wise must | |
