This is a fascinating story to me because this is really elitism vs. the working stiff, masquerading under the cloak of race. So race-obsessed we are in our culture that it obscures the reality of the situation to the point of absurdity.
First, these people are all doing their jobs. Cop responds to complaint, gets vital info, however undiplomatically, discovers no crime has been committed and begins to leave. Harvard African American Studies professor has a job too - find and explain racism wherever it rears its head, in history, in common practices and in the hearts of men. Mr. Gates gets paid well for this and has tremendous status as a college professor of Harvard. Cop gets barely middle-class wages and must work 50 weeks per year. Cop has a multitude of supervisors and masters to serve; Mr Gates has tenure and can do pretty much as he pleases most of the time. Mr Gates has connections Mr. Crowely could only dream of, the clout of Harvard University in Cambridge Mass, not to mention the President of the United States himself.
Gates had just returned from China, a country Mr. Crowder will likely never see as he can't afford the plane ticket or the time off from work. But Gates no doubt saw a different strain of racism in China, one he can't easily blame on white Americans. Black people are an oddity in Asia, and had Gates ventured anywhere beyond the tourist centers of Beijing he was likely gawked at and oogled by the non-white Chinese. They didn't know he was a professor, and he may have been mistaken for a retired basketball player more than once, which is slightly better than being mistaken for a criminal, yet despite the curious gawkers, I'm sure the Black man Gates was kowtowed to by a myriad of Chinese servants in hotels and restaurants quite sufficiently to keep him comfortable with the status he is used to receiving at Harvard and elsewhere in the US.
But hasn't Mr. Gates gotten the memo? Police are gruff, they are not particularly polite when they are investigating possible crimes, and as a white guy I can assure Mr. Gates that I have been treated similarly and worse by policemen in various cities in different circumstances where I was totally innocent. In fact, police can be downright nasty and I think there are far too many authoritarian drones in police forces, which is why I initially sympathized with Gates. However, after reading the report and reviewing the record of the police officer in question I just have to laugh. This is not racism or even bullying emanating from the cop, it's elitism and bullying coming from Mr. Gates!
Do you know who you are messing with?
It seems Mr Gates is animated by his bloated ego and his own prejudice and stereotypical mindset, not by his concern for ordinary black men who might be profiled. If he was concerned with ordinary black men i.e. those not tenured at Harvard, not President of the United States not the Mayor of Cambridge or the Governor of Massachussetts, he wouldn't make false charges, because it undermines the still somewhat real problem with authoritarian police officers - some of whom may have racial animosities as well as other traits unbecoming to those charged to protect and serve us all.
Then in a nationally televised press conference where the press asked no questions on our ailing economy, no questions on two simmering wars, no questions on corruption in government, Obama is asked about this trivial incident. And he answers as if this were a real issue!
Obama also was doing his job. After all, he was promoting a health care plan he hasn't read, and is on record admitting his unfamiliarity with key provisions of said plan, why shouldn't he weigh in on something else about which he doesn't have the facts?
Friday, July 24, 2009
Tuesday, June 2, 2009
Friday, April 24, 2009
Brit Health Bureaucrats Become Boss Clowns
Clown cannot wear giant shoes due to health and safety
This case of The British Health Ministry telling a clown what he can and can't wear is ripe for comedy; and the fact that the clown is still allowed to play double-bass, a drum kit and dress himself (in more appropriate shoes, of course) inside a flaming hoop of fire while balancing on a slack-rope is a testament to the absurdity that is state-run health care.
Had Mr. Kashkin gone to the hospital for treatment for burns, perhaps he could still wear the shoes but would have to lose the "flaming hoop of fire". Such is what happens when medical personnel direct clown acts.
We all know that once Universal Health Care is adopted it is a short trip toward more state control of our personal habits and practices. In Britain, obese people are denied hip-replacement surgery (along with nearly everyone else) and smokers are considered secondary citizens when it comes to treating lung ailments, having brought their misery upon themselves despite the years of cigarette taxes they paid.
If the state must spend money out-of-pocket for your excesses, it follows Mother Britain has a vested interest in your personal well-being lest it cost the treasury. The result is personal interference, and the Government becomes our nanny all the way to the grave, where alas we are no longer their grudging burden. But who would think it could go so far as directing plays or... clown bits?
Which brings us back to Mr Kashkin, the Russian clown. Russian clowns are usually very good in the same sense that Americans basketball players are good. The reason Kashkin is performing in Britain as a clown is the same reason that British rockers are giving concerts in Moscow.
The fact there are so many good Russian clowns is a result the high esteem circus is held in Russia, and the plethora of talent that was nurtured during the Soviet era. The Soviet Union believed the circus to be "The People's Theatre", and at one point there were 150 state-run and funded circuses traveling the 11 time zones, transcending different languages and ethic groups with feats of daring with physical comedy of clowns providing laughter for all.
The elite circus was The Moscow Circus, which had a dedicated building in Moscow, but also on occasion toured the world. In 1980 I had the pleasure of seeing the the Moscow Circus at the Spectrum in Philadelphia, and by far the best live performance I have ever seen was The Cranes; a display of consummate circus artistry that would make any Cirque de Soleil trapeze act weep with envy.
The Soviet Union gave free health care for all, in fact they pioneered the concept, and had no doubt treated tens of thousands of circus performers over the years for sprains, dislocations, breaks and fractures,apparently without complaint. I suppose in the central planning culture the added cost of treating circus injuries was deemed acceptable, given their role as ambassadors for the great Soviet system.
Now, the circus representatives must explain to the Ministry of Health why clown shoes are important, and there are in fact good reasons, (and I can't wait to write the dialogue for the upcoming farce) but first bear with me to explore in part the nature of the clown before I go into the abstractions about the shoes:
Clowns use skills to be funny, often by way of mocking impressive but meaningless stunts, and the audience is impressed with him only as a by-product, as he is actually making fun of the absurd human condition, as well as parodying the serious and highly skilled circus acts of his fellow performers. In Circus, this has the effect of adding levity and separation between daring climaxes. It also serves as a self-mockery by the circus production itself that is endearing to the audience, communicating that for all the hyperbole, they don't take themselves that seriously. The clown's goal is to be funny, not to impress as such. Mr Kashkin, as an expert in his field, knows the shoes are vital to his act.
This may sound silly; after all, you shouldn't need big shoes to be funny. But to focus on clown shoes by themselves misses the point. Certainly we Americans have had our fill of the type of clown who relies too much on the iconic costume itself and not enough on comic timing, pathos and dramatic absurdity needed for a successful (that is - funny) clown act. But funny shoes are a common thread in the history of physical comedy, and for good reason.
In the Middle Ages, court jesters used turned-up shoes to communicate ridiculousness, and the great Charlie Chaplin used funny shoes, along with his cane and bowler, to subtle but necessary effect. It is said that a woman first looks to a man's shoes for a primary indication of his seriousness.
So the big shoes of a clown convey immediately a harmless fellow who has no hope to impress us. And in the physical world, where the comedy of the clown resides, it is a goof on fundamentals. Any dancer, athlete or martial artist knows the importance of ground contact, foot placement and balance, thus the clowns' first contact with earth is questionable at the outset and gives him a gratuitous disadvantage. Further, the elongated feet serve as a tool to amplify the pantomime needed in a large venue like a circus.
Steve Martin (certainly a clown in the broad sense) was once asked, “How can you be so funny?"
"Each morning I put a slice of baloney in each of my shoes. And then, I feel funny.”
Beware Mr Kashkin, a few more slip-ups and your act will be reduced to playing a kazoo whilst pedaling a three-wheeled unicycle!
Americans take heed about Universal Health Care: If it's stupid, don't do it.
Mr Kashkin features in the circus' reworking of the Rasputin tale, The Monk's Dream.
His routine includes dressing himself whilst walking on a wire, dress himself within a hoop of fire, and playing a drum-kit, trumpet and double-bass all at the same time.
This case of The British Health Ministry telling a clown what he can and can't wear is ripe for comedy; and the fact that the clown is still allowed to play double-bass, a drum kit and dress himself (in more appropriate shoes, of course) inside a flaming hoop of fire while balancing on a slack-rope is a testament to the absurdity that is state-run health care.
Had Mr. Kashkin gone to the hospital for treatment for burns, perhaps he could still wear the shoes but would have to lose the "flaming hoop of fire". Such is what happens when medical personnel direct clown acts.
We all know that once Universal Health Care is adopted it is a short trip toward more state control of our personal habits and practices. In Britain, obese people are denied hip-replacement surgery (along with nearly everyone else) and smokers are considered secondary citizens when it comes to treating lung ailments, having brought their misery upon themselves despite the years of cigarette taxes they paid.
If the state must spend money out-of-pocket for your excesses, it follows Mother Britain has a vested interest in your personal well-being lest it cost the treasury. The result is personal interference, and the Government becomes our nanny all the way to the grave, where alas we are no longer their grudging burden. But who would think it could go so far as directing plays or... clown bits?
Which brings us back to Mr Kashkin, the Russian clown. Russian clowns are usually very good in the same sense that Americans basketball players are good. The reason Kashkin is performing in Britain as a clown is the same reason that British rockers are giving concerts in Moscow.
The fact there are so many good Russian clowns is a result the high esteem circus is held in Russia, and the plethora of talent that was nurtured during the Soviet era. The Soviet Union believed the circus to be "The People's Theatre", and at one point there were 150 state-run and funded circuses traveling the 11 time zones, transcending different languages and ethic groups with feats of daring with physical comedy of clowns providing laughter for all.
The elite circus was The Moscow Circus, which had a dedicated building in Moscow, but also on occasion toured the world. In 1980 I had the pleasure of seeing the the Moscow Circus at the Spectrum in Philadelphia, and by far the best live performance I have ever seen was The Cranes; a display of consummate circus artistry that would make any Cirque de Soleil trapeze act weep with envy.
The Soviet Union gave free health care for all, in fact they pioneered the concept, and had no doubt treated tens of thousands of circus performers over the years for sprains, dislocations, breaks and fractures,apparently without complaint. I suppose in the central planning culture the added cost of treating circus injuries was deemed acceptable, given their role as ambassadors for the great Soviet system.
Now, the circus representatives must explain to the Ministry of Health why clown shoes are important, and there are in fact good reasons, (and I can't wait to write the dialogue for the upcoming farce) but first bear with me to explore in part the nature of the clown before I go into the abstractions about the shoes:
Clowns use skills to be funny, often by way of mocking impressive but meaningless stunts, and the audience is impressed with him only as a by-product, as he is actually making fun of the absurd human condition, as well as parodying the serious and highly skilled circus acts of his fellow performers. In Circus, this has the effect of adding levity and separation between daring climaxes. It also serves as a self-mockery by the circus production itself that is endearing to the audience, communicating that for all the hyperbole, they don't take themselves that seriously. The clown's goal is to be funny, not to impress as such. Mr Kashkin, as an expert in his field, knows the shoes are vital to his act.
Mr Kashkin, 40, from Temruk, Russia, said: "The shoes are an important part of my costume, and I was disappointed to be told I couldn't do this part of my act.
"I feel fine, and think I could do it in the shoes – the impact might be lost on the audience now."
This may sound silly; after all, you shouldn't need big shoes to be funny. But to focus on clown shoes by themselves misses the point. Certainly we Americans have had our fill of the type of clown who relies too much on the iconic costume itself and not enough on comic timing, pathos and dramatic absurdity needed for a successful (that is - funny) clown act. But funny shoes are a common thread in the history of physical comedy, and for good reason.
In the Middle Ages, court jesters used turned-up shoes to communicate ridiculousness, and the great Charlie Chaplin used funny shoes, along with his cane and bowler, to subtle but necessary effect. It is said that a woman first looks to a man's shoes for a primary indication of his seriousness.
So the big shoes of a clown convey immediately a harmless fellow who has no hope to impress us. And in the physical world, where the comedy of the clown resides, it is a goof on fundamentals. Any dancer, athlete or martial artist knows the importance of ground contact, foot placement and balance, thus the clowns' first contact with earth is questionable at the outset and gives him a gratuitous disadvantage. Further, the elongated feet serve as a tool to amplify the pantomime needed in a large venue like a circus.
Steve Martin (certainly a clown in the broad sense) was once asked, “How can you be so funny?"
"Each morning I put a slice of baloney in each of my shoes. And then, I feel funny.”
Rejecting that it was a case of health and safety gone mad, Larry Dewitt, Health and Safety adviser to the circus said: "I'm not a believer in political correctness, or doing things for the sake of doing it however.
"You have to take a common-sense approach with these things – if it's stupid, don't do it."
Beware Mr Kashkin, a few more slip-ups and your act will be reduced to playing a kazoo whilst pedaling a three-wheeled unicycle!
Americans take heed about Universal Health Care: If it's stupid, don't do it.
Monday, April 20, 2009
Friday, April 10, 2009
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
Condensed Galt
John Galt's Speech
For twelve years you've been asking "Who is John Galt?" This is John Galt speaking. I'm the man who's taken away your victims and thus destroyed your world. You've heard it said that this is an age of moral crisis and that Man's sins are destroying the world. But your chief virtue has been sacrifice, and you've demanded more sacrifices at every disaster. You've sacrificed justice to mercy and happiness to duty. So why should you be afraid of the world around you?
Your world is only the product of your sacrifices. While you were dragging the men who made your happiness possible to your sacrificial altars, I beat you to it. I reached them first and told them about the game you were playing and where it would take them. I explained the consequences of your 'brother-love' morality, which they had been too innocently generous to understand. You won't find them now, when you need them more than ever.
We're on strike against your creed of unearned rewards and unrewarded duties. If you want to know how I made them quit, I told them exactly what I'm telling you tonight. I taught them the morality of Reason -- that it was right to pursue one's own happiness as one's principal goal in life. I don't consider the pleasure of others my goal in life, nor do I consider my pleasure the goal of anyone else's life.
I am a trader. I earn what I get in trade for what I produce. I ask for nothing more or nothing less than what I earn. That is justice. I don't force anyone to trade with me; I only trade for mutual benefit. Force is the great evil that has no place in a rational world. One may never force another human to act against his/her judgment. If you deny a man's right to Reason, you must also deny your right to your own judgment. Yet you have allowed your world to be run by means of force, by men who claim that fear and joy are equal incentives, but that fear and force are more practical.
You've allowed such men to occupy positions of power in your world by preaching that all men are evil from the moment they're born. When men believe this, they see nothing wrong in acting in any way they please. The name of this absurdity is 'original sin'. That's inmpossible. That which is outside the possibility of choice is also outside the province of morality. To call sin that which is outside man's choice is a mockery of justice. To say that men are born with a free will but with a tendency toward evil is ridiculous. If the tendency is one of choice, it doesn't come at birth. If it is not a tendency of choice, then man's will is not free.
And then there's your 'brother-love' morality. Why is it moral to serve others, but not yourself? If enjoyment is a value, why is it moral when experienced by others, but not by you? Why is it immoral to produce something of value and keep it for yourself, when it is moral for others who haven't earned it to accept it? If it's virtuous to give, isn't it then selfish to take?
Your acceptance of the code of selflessness has made you fear the man who has a dollar less than you because it makes you feel that that dollar is rightfully his. You hate the man with a dollar more than you because the dollar he's keeping is rightfully yours. Your code has made it impossible to know when to give and when to grab.
You know that you can't give away everything and starve yourself. You've forced yourselves to live with undeserved, irrational guilt. Is it ever proper to help another man? No, if he demands it as his right or as a duty that you owe him. Yes, if it's your own free choice based on your judgment of the value of that person and his struggle. This country wasn't built by men who sought handouts. In its brilliant youth, this country showed the rest of the world what greatness was possible to Man and what happiness is possible on Earth.
Then it began apologizing for its greatness and began giving away its wealth, feeling guilty for having produced more than ikts neighbors. Twelve years ago, I saw what was wrong with the world and where the battle for Life had to be fought. I saw that the enemy was an inverted morality and that my acceptance of that morality was its only power. I was the first of the men who refused to give up the pursuit of his own happiness in order to serve others.
To those of you who retain some remnant of dignity and the will to live your lives for yourselves, you have the chance to make the same choice. Examine your values and understand that you must choose one side or the other. Any compromise between good and evil only hurts the good and helps the evil.
If you've understood what I've said, stop supporting your destroyers. Don't accept their philosophy. Your destroyers hold you by means of your endurance, your generosity, your innocence, and your love. Don't exhaust yourself to help build the kind of world that you see around you now. In the name of the best within you, don't sacrifice the world to those who will take away your happiness for it.
The world will change when you are ready to pronounce this oath:
I swear by my Life and my love of it that I will never live for the sake of another man,nor ask another man to live for the sake of mine.
Text courtesy of Daryl J. Sroufe
For twelve years you've been asking "Who is John Galt?" This is John Galt speaking. I'm the man who's taken away your victims and thus destroyed your world. You've heard it said that this is an age of moral crisis and that Man's sins are destroying the world. But your chief virtue has been sacrifice, and you've demanded more sacrifices at every disaster. You've sacrificed justice to mercy and happiness to duty. So why should you be afraid of the world around you?
Your world is only the product of your sacrifices. While you were dragging the men who made your happiness possible to your sacrificial altars, I beat you to it. I reached them first and told them about the game you were playing and where it would take them. I explained the consequences of your 'brother-love' morality, which they had been too innocently generous to understand. You won't find them now, when you need them more than ever.
We're on strike against your creed of unearned rewards and unrewarded duties. If you want to know how I made them quit, I told them exactly what I'm telling you tonight. I taught them the morality of Reason -- that it was right to pursue one's own happiness as one's principal goal in life. I don't consider the pleasure of others my goal in life, nor do I consider my pleasure the goal of anyone else's life.
I am a trader. I earn what I get in trade for what I produce. I ask for nothing more or nothing less than what I earn. That is justice. I don't force anyone to trade with me; I only trade for mutual benefit. Force is the great evil that has no place in a rational world. One may never force another human to act against his/her judgment. If you deny a man's right to Reason, you must also deny your right to your own judgment. Yet you have allowed your world to be run by means of force, by men who claim that fear and joy are equal incentives, but that fear and force are more practical.
You've allowed such men to occupy positions of power in your world by preaching that all men are evil from the moment they're born. When men believe this, they see nothing wrong in acting in any way they please. The name of this absurdity is 'original sin'. That's inmpossible. That which is outside the possibility of choice is also outside the province of morality. To call sin that which is outside man's choice is a mockery of justice. To say that men are born with a free will but with a tendency toward evil is ridiculous. If the tendency is one of choice, it doesn't come at birth. If it is not a tendency of choice, then man's will is not free.
And then there's your 'brother-love' morality. Why is it moral to serve others, but not yourself? If enjoyment is a value, why is it moral when experienced by others, but not by you? Why is it immoral to produce something of value and keep it for yourself, when it is moral for others who haven't earned it to accept it? If it's virtuous to give, isn't it then selfish to take?
Your acceptance of the code of selflessness has made you fear the man who has a dollar less than you because it makes you feel that that dollar is rightfully his. You hate the man with a dollar more than you because the dollar he's keeping is rightfully yours. Your code has made it impossible to know when to give and when to grab.
You know that you can't give away everything and starve yourself. You've forced yourselves to live with undeserved, irrational guilt. Is it ever proper to help another man? No, if he demands it as his right or as a duty that you owe him. Yes, if it's your own free choice based on your judgment of the value of that person and his struggle. This country wasn't built by men who sought handouts. In its brilliant youth, this country showed the rest of the world what greatness was possible to Man and what happiness is possible on Earth.
Then it began apologizing for its greatness and began giving away its wealth, feeling guilty for having produced more than ikts neighbors. Twelve years ago, I saw what was wrong with the world and where the battle for Life had to be fought. I saw that the enemy was an inverted morality and that my acceptance of that morality was its only power. I was the first of the men who refused to give up the pursuit of his own happiness in order to serve others.
To those of you who retain some remnant of dignity and the will to live your lives for yourselves, you have the chance to make the same choice. Examine your values and understand that you must choose one side or the other. Any compromise between good and evil only hurts the good and helps the evil.
If you've understood what I've said, stop supporting your destroyers. Don't accept their philosophy. Your destroyers hold you by means of your endurance, your generosity, your innocence, and your love. Don't exhaust yourself to help build the kind of world that you see around you now. In the name of the best within you, don't sacrifice the world to those who will take away your happiness for it.
The world will change when you are ready to pronounce this oath:
I swear by my Life and my love of it that I will never live for the sake of another man,nor ask another man to live for the sake of mine.
Text courtesy of Daryl J. Sroufe
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
"If you have nothing to hide..."
"We are becoming far too eager to give away our liberties in the face of false security. We want to make our plane and we don't want a five-minute hassle so we are eager to give up our freedom, and that is unfortunate," Mr. Bierfeldt said.
TSA detains official from Ron Paul group
More important than reading the article Listen to the audio
TSA detains official from Ron Paul group
More important than reading the article Listen to the audio
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)