the_whole_thing
byron kho
in technicolor
In the News and a Good Way to Let Off Steam
the_political_page
in_the_news
other_musings
linking_pages
An Old Response to a Friend
When you say that patriotism has in some way turned into discrimination, backlash and extremely limited freedom of thought and expression, you are very right. Especially in smaller towns, where the generally lower international exposure and education make the population vulnerable to an ignorance of global politics, one must not only be a patriot but a follower in herd politics. The party affiliations in small towns are much stronger - people vote on party lines religiously and the views of on-high are viewed as just that, on-high. Since many in my area are Republican, it is a very dangerous thing to be very visibly pro-Democrat, because there are vicious smear campaigns and social silences toward the "victim". Bush, naturally, is in supreme standing and is not one to be argued with; if he says a war is necessary to keep mom and pops safe with a chicken in every pot and a car in every driveway, then a war must be necessary. There is no room for disagreement for a disagreement means a break with the majority, and why should you know any better than a whole townful of Americans (with emphasis on the "American")? In a place where you must be crazy to act Arab in public (the hicks get all riled up and call you sand niggers and saddam lovers and baby killers) and being French means that all you'll get is a wedgie while everyone forgets who supported them in their own struggle for independence way back when. And why should you question the government, whose every action is to protect our own American citizens? Who hides under the recently passed Official Secrets Act and now locks up presidential records "indefinitely" instead of just for 2 decades, for the purposes of national security? Who interferes in countries where it shouldn't - Latin American overthrows (contras, Sandinistas), African barriers to Communism (Cold War, Afghanistan), Vietnam (as morale boosting easy war) - and then determines that for its own "security", it must continue? Who chooses not to interfere in places where it should on the basis that the people can decide what they want to do with themselves - Rwanda, Liberia (where 2300 Americans wait off the coast watching the Liberians slowly get massacred off)? Who created a very illegal extensive satellite system to spy on all North American communications and then ignore the information it received and allowed 9/11 to happen? Who wasn't afraid of ridiculing its supposed allies and the UN and then suddenly requests the UN's help after shaming it, and blacking out 28 pages of a document to protect all those supposed "allies"? Whose largest ally suspiciously plugged a leak by "finding" the dead body of the chief researcher who signed off on findings of WMD's in Iraq? From history, we learn that this patriotism is a vicious cycle. In times of danger, it is necessary to suppress freedom of thought and expression and promote a patriotism (sometimes morally repugnant) that will keep the country together and support its army to save itself - Germany with National Socialism, Russia in its revolutions, Christian Europe defending and attacking against Muslim Arabia. Seen from a larger picture, it is absolutely necessary from a political standpoint. While that is true, the individual freedoms that are supported in words by the American Constitution would be against that style of political rule; if we were to rebel and ask for our rights during times of crisis - such as during Afghanistan or Gulf War II - I am sure military tribunals, sedition laws and "national security" would be banded around like candy, because in the end, that is politically necessary for national survival as a power in the global checkerboard. So, while frustration is adamant and anger runs rampant, remember that survival is about adaptation, and tricky maneuvers. Global politics and power struggle requires that the nation have certain attitudes, and while we might suffer now, it is necessary in the long run. To fix our situation, though it will be very tricky, all one would have to do is save face and rebuild all by finding a scapegoat, blaming it on the scapegoat and then ridding oneself of the scapegoat. In this case, President Bush would be the scapegoat - but in reality, he is not to blame. It is only our past history, past attitudes and past image of ourselves within the grand scheme of things that forced him to act such and thus reinforce the herd mentality of our fellow Americans. So, accept, adapt and fight for what you believe in - because only then can we change the vicious cycle that is our fate and our history.
What's News?
I've been thinking about ideas for articles during my beat. Yes, I do have the technology and research beat, but I feel it's very limited in its scope, right now. The true science stories don't get covered, especially because the "medical" beat mainly goes for infrastructure problem stories about the University Health system and the Hospital. What I want to do is yes, cover downloading-related stories, but curtail how much print is spent on that, since I feel we've had an overkill on that kind of thing in the past year. No one cares so much about Napster and other legally viable options for music downloads. What they do care about are ways around the system, an area that the DP cannot cover in true fashion without being held publicly accountable. My main point is that I will cover more Research-related topics - cutting to the heart of the science done at Penn.
One area in need of coverage are the technological innovations discovered at Penn. Frequently, these are assigned to GAs after the inventions or what have you have already become widely available, so the stories are less timely. What I want to do is get more of these things out under the beat so there is more educated coverage on time. I presume that many of these technologies will be from Penn Engineering, whether bio-engineering or normal engineering. This can include Penn work with nanotechnology (and how it deals with the McCain supported decision that prohibits federal funding to any nanotech research), virus creation (especially dealing with the newly created cellphone viruses, passed with Blackberry technology), flash memory cards, new incredibly fast disk drives using the principle of "extraordinary magnetoresistance", robotics at Penn, SCO Group and the Linux controversy, video game development, identity protection protocols and technologies, and even Penn contributions to forensic science, which could be a very interesting subject.
There is also the more social-science based aspects of research. These will probably be reserved for longer articles and features, as they can't be accurately captured in a short article. Actually, these would probably do better in a magazine format (like NYTimes Magazine). Sample issues include the effects of immigration policies on scientific research within the United States. This ties in with the gradual decrease in science and math literacy in the United States, the large foreign population manning the helm at research labs all across the country, and the "brain drain" from their home countries. This had a notable effect on Canada in the past few years. In particular, the move of health professionals across the border due to oppressive OHIP and blanket medical insurance programs has caused lots of trouble to an ailing system, and to research that needs to be continued at major universities there. This can include, or as a separate article, the effects of war-time immigration policies that constitute institutional xenophobia. As defensive measures to terrorism, limited immigration and draconian customs policies have decreased the manpower available for key scientific research. Many scientists (and even writers, for some strange reason) have been scared off by the oppressive rules governing access by student visa. Especially sensitive areas like vaccine creation and scientific countermeasures for bioterrorism have been hampered because there are no faculty available to work in those areas. A majority of the experts in those areas had been foreign, and current regulations prohibit nationals from certain countries from working on those areas, in fear of espionage and sabotage, etc. This points to a severe problem in science recruitment and education within America, as we do not have the manpower to facilitate our science labs, which are the best in the world.
Other issues include the effect of high-tech outsourcing on higher level science education in the United States. Also, American policy on AIDS treatments and distribution of drugs into the Third World, as necessary to combat the global crisis. Another interesting idea would track legal decisions involving science - a check to see if law is lagging behind scientific progress, and if this is bad for research as a whole. As a sidenote, I am particularly interested in gene patenting. Ever since it was allowed in the 1990s, there have been lawsuits concerning companies and foundations who hold patents for genes, and scientists from business and academia alike who seek to work on these genes without profit oversight. The Patent and Trademark Office reversed its old policy of not allowing live animals and genes that regulate life to be patented - this violated previous human concern of the ethics of business. But somehow, that was turned around in the groundbreaking Chakrabarty case and today, big drug companies own many of the genes that make us who we are. An Australian drug company owns much of the sequences of "junk DNA" in the human body, that are now being found to be extremely important. This has been the focus of many furious lawsuits. As some universities who hold or could potentially hold patents have been involved in some of these cases, science students at Penn should be concerned. It would also be interesting for the economic and ethical aspects to the struggle.
Other interesting social issues for the beat include: email bankruptcy (how do we deal with communication when email itself can be swamped and take too much time?); the myth of the paperless office (and how email causes an average 40% increase in paper consumption); the Small World phenomenon; how, with the widespread use of computers, reading is way down in America, as is going to museums, musical performances, doing volunteer work, and going to sporting events (another way of saying this is that people who don't use computers go out more, and people who do tend to do nothing else but sit at their computers); Intelligent Design theory; problems for the coming election with paperless voting (voting by Internet); the radio frequency id chip (RFID) for use in supermarket products for streamlined shopping; sustainable design in architecture and house planning; profiles of recent Internet frauds and viruses; Kevin Fong's research into treatment of intensive care patients with space conditions; what Dream Workshop (choose your own dream) will do to the sacred nature of the dream in the sleep state; and copyright renewals (National Library wanted to do a showcase on James Joyce, as they owned the works - but his grandson owned the copyright... the 50 year limitation on copyright had already ran out, but the founding of the EU extended these copyrights, such that the National Library would be in fact violating the copyright if they did a show which by all means should have been fine and legal) and what Ashcroft legislation will do to it (this has its technological and research aspect). Lastly, a review of what Gutmann plans to do with funding for research, like the coverage of J-Ro's Agenda for Excellence.
Troublespots
http://www.guncite.com/journals/embar.html
The Embarrassing Second Amendment, which reads: A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed. This discusses what a militia can consist of, in accordance with the word and spirit of constitutional law. Do we have the right to keep and bear arms? Yes, the NRA says. And yes, the author says. As in most issues, what is needed is a consensus. Guns ARE allowed by the Constitution, but what is required is something to import safety into the proceedings, wherein violence and accidental death will be ruled out - or, as the amendment states, "well-regulated."
http://slate.msn.com/id/2102856/
I had a problem with spyware and malware this week. Don't let it be you. This guy argues that consumers must be smart. You don't have to understand the entire thing - but know something about it. Don't take it for granted that all the technology you get (including software and e-mail, which you use everyday, and which is the main cause of all the viruses and infection problems one would have) is in your best interest. Because it's not. Hackers sent a copy of a cellphone virus to researchers to show that they could do it. It wasn't malicious code, but it proves a point - we're not invulnerable, and we can't pretend we are. So smarten up, and take a little responsibility.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5284032/
Sierra Club loses its bid to get documents pertaining to VP Cheney's energy task force. Task force? Seems uninteresting. But the fact is, they came up with conclusions that were friendly to the energy industry - and among task force members were Cheney himself (who has his Halliburton petroleum company scandal), Kenneth Lay (of Enron fame), Condoleeza Rice (on the board of Chevron, and has a company oil tanker named after her), and Lewis Libby (Cheney's chief of staff, that recently profited on the sale of tens of thousands of dollars in energy company stock). What is even more suspicious is that they refuse to open up. And really, what is there to hide? Is creating energy policy so vital to national interests that it must be hidden away forever? Cheney, in 2002, related that he could not release these documents (until so ordered by Judge Kessler, which was then overturned) because of 'executive privilege' (according to the Guardian, 3/1/2002).
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/21/opinion/21HERB.html
As I'm basically in the medical profession - remember, even little researchers and undergrads like me, all our work can end up treating you some day - this article hits home. Who hears about medical malpractice? We hear about insurance, how Pennsylvania is emptying of doctors, how people sue all the time... well, this guy says no. He says that statistics don't lie, basically, and lawsuits are going down, and jackpot justice isn't really reality. The real reason is that irresponsible doctors are doing their thing, and no one blowing the whistle. And those greedy insurance companies looking for "reform" so they can bilk everyone out of more money. Like travel insurance... is that really necessary? Anyway, that's off the point. What is important is that we might have the blame apportioned wrong in our house of cards. What isn't good for us, is good for the insurance business, and for doctors. What isn't good for the doctors, is good for the insurance business. What's good for the insurance business ain't good for anyone, and it's all just one big... I'm confused.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/state/nations/yugoslavia_01.shtml
A BBC History of Yugoslavia.
http://emperors-clothes.com/gilwhite/alija2.htm
Associate Professor Francisco Gil-White of Penn argues that the Serbs were the real oppressed in Yugoslavia. The Balkan Wars, he says, consisted of "NATO support[ing] a campaign of ethnic cleansing and genocide against innocent Bosnian Serb civilians, and then NATO blamed the victims." He limits the blame to Islamist fanatics who, in addition to their racial grievances, also victimized moderate Muslims ostensibly on their side. Additionally, he argues that the Serbs were wrongfully accused by US officials, and Milosevic wrongly indicted on war crimes - it is still an open wound to the international Serbian community.
http://www.english.upenn.edu/~afilreis/Holocaust/balkans-atrocities.html
An article on Penn professor Al Filreis's Holocaust archive presents information from the internationally accepted point of view. To this date, it is accepted that atrocities in the Balkan Wars were mostly committed by Serbian officials, invluding President Slobodan Milosevic, Radovan Karadzic, the leader of Bosnia's Serbs and General Ratko Mladic, commander of the Bosnian Serb army. Intelligence from the CIA and other US sources further indict these men, although admittedly Croats and Muslims have also done their share of inhumane activity.
http://www.psych.upenn.edu/seligman/chirot.htm
Professor Martin Seligman of Penn, in a report on Ethnopolitical Conflict mentions that "in all these cases political leaders in charge of state controlled armies and police forces initiated mass murder in order to hold on to power and to further a nationalist vision of what kind of state they wished to rule. In all these cases, those targeted for death or expulsion were felt to be hereditarily antagonistic to the project of the rulers, and a mortal danger to the rulers� ambitions. In all these cases, political leaders convinced their followers that the danger applied to their entire group, so that mass murder was the best, most viable solution."
Drug Costs
This is quite disturbing.
If you buy 100 tablets of Prozac, it will typically cost you $247.47. Price of the ingredients themselves is roughly 11 cents. The markup? An astounding 224,973%.
For other mainstream drugs like these, markup goes from a minimum of 2000% all the way to the ridiculous heights for Prozac.
Drug companies say the cost is justified because of high R&D costs. Yet, R&D cover only about 16% of operating expenses every year. The rest goes into marketing and probably lobbying up on Capitol Hill. They are said to be one of the most powerful lobbies on the Hill. So where's that justification?
The drug issue in America is making me really mad. Bush's faith-based initiatives and abstinence-focused campaigns to halt diseases like AIDS (where is the sense in stopping sexually transmitted diseases by paying for abstinence programs when people have been having illicit sex since the beginning of time, prudishness or not?) have spent wasted billions when the money should be going to attack the disease itself, using our vertiable fount of scientific knowledge and our supposed humanity. Attacking the moral basis of these diseases does nothing. What is most troubling, however, is a seeming collusion of government with big pharmaceutical companies. The NIH has started inquiries into allegations (and in some cases, admittances) of scientists spending government time on work for private companies, and benefiting way beyond their government salaries. This in a time when efforts to combat global AIDS using drugs that are at least mildly effective are being hampered because the US refuses to help distribute cheaper, generic drugs and instead demand that charity organizations buy name-brand drugs from US companies if they want US funds (Bill Gates and Bono have given as much money as the US government has forked up for global AIDS). How can poor people in Africa afford drugs that even hard-working Americans can't pay for? Not even AIDS, but how about normal drugs? How come buying these, even with Medicare, bankrupt Grandma and Grandpa? As for this article, why is Medicare not allowed to negotiate with drug companies for pharmaceutical discounts? I can't think of ONE solitary reason. Medicare is supposed to help the public get health care, not hamper these efforts.
Bombing of Iraq
Clinton's bombing of Iraq also had the hyped-up, not-enough-intel-but-let's-go-ahead-with-it-and-pretend-we-did-have-enough feel to it. Scary parallels. AND... a Democrat is just as capable as a Republican of buying public opinion with war. But Clinton was far more effective in eliciting sympathy.
http://www.newyorker.com/archive/content/?020930fr_archive02
Fahrenheit 9/11 Critiques
I've been reading critiques and counter-critiques on Fahrenheit 9/11. They are quite fascinating. Also fascinating are the FARK.com comments.
Here's Dave Kopel at the Independence Institute, cataloguing 59 Deceits of the movie:
http://anton-sirius.dailykos.com/story/2004/7/6/1942/00222
Here's Anton Sirius of the Daily KOS, counter-critiquing Kopel: http://anton-sirius.dailykos.com/story/2004/7/6/1942/00222
Here's Michael Moore's own defense: http://www.michaelmoore.com/warroom/f911notes/
Here's the FARk user comments on Kopel's article: http://forums.fark.com/cgi/fark/kibble.pl?IDLink=1067203
As well, I was reading a July 30 article from the Albuquerque Journal that goes as follows:
http://www.abqjournal.com/elex/204620elex07-30-04.htm
|