Want a good analogy for what is wrong with this country? This jackass calling on the radio is going on and on about the oppressed racial minorities being crushed under the boots of the evil capitalist American system. The root of his assertion was that there were no jobs to be had. The radio host then said that millions of people every year immigrated to America because there were all kinds of jobs.

This is where I get pissed:

The jackass replies: You mean you want them to work in the fields for low wages? He sounded horrified, shocked and offended. Hey, dickhead, my grandfather (gasp) worked in the fields for low wages. Had a bunch of kids, some of whom grew up to make good money doing other things.

Yes, I know it is a pity he couldn't do something honorable like, say, defend drug cartels in Federal Court, design video games or create a better tasting cigarette, but hey, not everyone gets to have the good jobs. America is lost the moment an honest job is reduced to something beneath us. Boy, I'm pissed.

Posted by Bill Turner at 7:35 AM EDT

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

I preface this post with the noteworthy giblet of news that my father proudly totes a little card, granted by the Bureau of Indian Affairs, that says he's a Cherokee. My mother's mother is a Cherokee. I'm a half-assed Irishman with loads of Cherokee blood coursing through me. Culturally, I am a mix of Old line Floridian, Tico, Boricua, American and, again, half-assed Irishman.

You see, I was born with Cherokee blood, but I know from extensive reading that to be Cherokee is to be good and ready to be screwed. Why? Puhlease. If you can put down the new Philadelphia history curriculum for a moment, I'll give you some insight into true multiculturalism.

It begins with a group of people called Cherokees. As indigenous people go, they were well advanced in European ways. They had a written language, a constitution, a body of law, a structured society and they even had Ye old Bible translated into their language. That is pretty damned impressive for a bunch of "savages."

But, curse the luck, they also had the extreme misfortune of not LOOKING too European. In the 1820's, this was a minor problem. It was a minor problem because of a minor piece of legislation called the Indian Removal Act. Uncle Sam had a nice hunk of dust and buffalo crap set aside for the people who didn't look European enough.

As a rule, God-fearing, church-going and law abiding people living in the Carolinas and Georgia didn't really see the appeal of dust storms and buffalo crap. Alas, Andrew Jackson was an obstinate sort, and he was bloody-minded when it came to those not-so-European looking Americans. So the good old US Government set to work to toss these people out and get some damned fine Eurpean stock in on the land.

Now the Cherokees had a problem with that. I mean, picking up and hauling your barn, cattle, family and slaves (I already said that they were practically Europeans, right?) out to dust and buffalo crap was a logistical nightmare. So the duly appointed Government representatives got together and made the decision that the US government was, to paraphrase, out of its friggin' mind. So they politely declined the offer to move west.

Uncle Sam found ONE A-HOLE, who went by the name of Major Ridge, who would agree to picking up and heading west. Best estimates have it that Ridge commanded the respect of about 500 out of 17,000 Cherokees. By my calculations, that's roughly THREE PERCENT OF ALL AVAILABLE "SAVAGES." That was enough for Uncle Sam to say, send them west.

Think about this: Democrats won't accept that George W. Bush has a mandate and he's running around with 52 percent of the people behind him (according to official tallies). So the US screwed an entire nation over with a minority of 3 percent approving.

Which brings us to multiculturalism.

Chief Osceola was a Seminole who got screwed. He didn't much see the point of negotiating with the US Government (Gee, why?). They caught him anyway. But they couldn't get those pesky Seminoles. They melted into the swamps and just wouldn't give up. The US did the only thing they could really do, which was to round up the ones they could, ship them to Oklahoma and ignore the rest.

ENTER THE NCAA

The Seminoles who got away waited until the moment was right and got revenge. They built huge casinos and started recouping their losses from the stupid white settlers who built condos all over their prime real estate. And THEY HAD A BRAND. So when Florida State University slapped a spear on their helmet and called themselves Seminoles, well, it was free advertising.

National Championships followed and the Seminoles were raking the big bucks in: Literally.

Then the NCAA showed up. They're run by a group known as Universities, who are better at crushing culture than the US government can ever hope to be. Don't EVER piss off a University professor, you'll fail for sure. And don't ever stand out, unless you're holding a sign that says W. (insert your favorite I hate the president line here).

In their bid to crush racism (which is University speak for "Anything that the University capriciously determines might be offensive"), they went and listened to a couple of Seminoles who were in Oklahoma. Now, I don't know if they descended from the captured bunch, but they weren't by any accounts that I read, in the casino business.

And with a COUPLE OF SEMINOLES, the NCAA SINGLE HANDEDLY RUINED A PERFECT BRAND. If that isn't racism, what is?

Just let a Native American try to get ahead, and the NCAA is there to beat him down. It's just a replay of the same tactics that the US Government used in the past. All in the name of being good to the indians. The NCAA says it is doing the Seminoles a favor by giving them their dignity. Funny, but the US Government said they were doing the Cherokees a favor by giving them a new homeland. The US Government was giving the Cherokees a homeland when they already had one and the NCAA is giving the Seminoles their dignity when they never noticed it was gone.

Same buffalo crap, different century.

Posted by Bill Turner at 12:14 AM EDT

Updated: August 19, 2005 9:46 PM EDT

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

Every once in a while, I start to wonder if there isn't something insane running the universe. Right now I am very much disturbed by the rampant Anti-Semitism that I see across the web. Yes, I know the arguable difference between Anti-Semitism and Anti-Israel. But "Jews are the Problem" is not an anti-Israel title. And I see posts like that all over the place.

What I find particularly disturbing is that I can't seem to categorize the people who believe this sort of nonsense. Some are easy to spot. You know, the white hooded ones who have a digital Hitler stamped on their blogs. Some are surprising, because they otherwise would seem like rational people. Some are shocking. People I would never have guessed from previous posts.

It also strikes me that there are many posts like that in the anti-war crowd. I'm debating calling all of these people out, because I don't want to give them publicity for their hate. It's nuts to rant about the futility of hatred while spewing hate.

I am seriously baffled by this. I have no idea what to do about it. I don't even know if there is anything to do. I make no secret of the fact that I support maximum civil liberties. People should be allowed to clearly identify their beliefs in public. I just wonder how to counter the lies.

Posted by Bill Turner at 8:31 PM EDT

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

"After September 11th, it almost goes without saying that religious violence in the name of a holy cause has escalated . Killing in the name of God constitutes a major driver of violent conflicts today. No major religion has been, or is today, a stranger to violence from its extremists, and that violence will pose challenges for U.S. foreign policy and for the analysts who seek to inform that policy. So, too, comparisons across forms of religious violence are instructive. New Religious Movements (NRMs) – which are almost always offshoots, however bizarre, of major religious traditions – have also emerged as sources of violence. Yet Islamic extremists are now in a class by themselves as a threat to the United States, as a transnational, non-state movement with the chance to appeal to a billion and a half people." Quite the beginning to a report that clearly outlines a set of perspectives on our current global conflict. And to deny that there is a global conflict is, in my opinion, to deny a stark reality that will become more real with each terrorist strike.

Read the full Rand Report

Read the Rand Report Summary

The outlines of New Religious Movements (NRM's) are particularly useful and allow for a more reasoned understanding of the context of current violence. I would have liked to have seen a more detailed study of the ascendance of these groups, but that is a study for a different time. As it stands, the definition given is sufficient to get a clear picture of the conflict at hand.

Two points:

1. Whereas the US approach to religion (somewhat hands off) is useful within our cultural context, it appears to be useless in defining and relating to peoples unused to our cultural framework.

2. This fundamental disconnect is particularly dangerous when interpreted in the framework of our own internal debate about our best course of action.

We were caught unprepared for the outbreak of this problem. Now we appear to be in denial (These are not conclusions of the report, but seem evident to me) that the problem is what it is.

At any rate, the report is definitely worth a read.

Posted by Bill Turner at 7:02 PM EDT

Updated: August 10, 2005 7:43 PM EDT

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

Dire, but valid, predictions should not be ignored. Even when they may run counter to long held beliefs. Now comes a cart before the horse argument from Patrick Basham of CATO.

Having travelled across this hemisphere and lived for half of my adult life outside of the United States, I know through observation that culture (not the Humanities sense of the word) greatly determines how a country's government will function. Where a culture is tolerant, democracy thrives. Where a culture is repressive, authoritarian impulse drives democracy out.

My own observation comes from several cultures, but the most obvious anecdote is the difference between neighboring countries Costa Rica and Nicaragua. Costa Rica, a home to 17 (at last count) political parties and deep seated beliefs in the fundamental freedom of the individual in a political sense, thrives and grows. Nicaragua, which shares a border to the north, is a country in a semi-permanent state of implosion.

Culture builds government and Basham isn't afraid to point right at the bedsores of America's newest client democracy that lies wounded from bloody conflict. His conclusions are telling:

"Four cultural factors play an essential, collective role in stimulating and reinforcing a stable democratic political system. The first is political trust. The second factor is social tolerance. The third is a widespread recognition of the importance of basic political liberties. The fourth is popular support for gender equality.

Paradoxically, a more democratic Iraq may also be a repressive one. It is one thing to adopt formal democracy but quite another to attain stable democracy. A successful democracy cannot be legislated. The White House is placing a very large political wager that the formation of democratic institutions in Iraq can stimulate a democratic political culture."

Read the full report (PDF)http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa505.pdf

The observations are disconcerting, but we are inclined to make a nod to reality if we ever want to get out of Iraq.

Posted by Bill Turner at 7:35 AM EDT

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

Now comes the hissy fit, but it could be a "Jedi Mind Trick." Let's start with the fact that I have been super critical of most of the debate surrounding Judge John G. Roberts Jr.'s nomination to the supreme court. Not so much the merits of the debate (it is an important thing to know where a potential justice stands on the issues), but the tone and tactics. I was absolutely annoyed by the whole flap about the Judge's early legal career. We have a good idea about who started that poo and I'm not naming names. - He started it.

Then yesterday, I started looking around the web at everything Supreme Courtish and it was frightening. A sampling:

"After hearing about Judge Roberts, support for a filibuster against him skyrockets." - you have to read the full focus group report for the Center for Reproductive Rights (borderline hysteria, great laughs) - Read it here

Growing alarm (I am not making this up) from Planned Parenthood - "Today Planned Parenthood Federation of America expressed growing alarm over Supreme Court nominee John Roberts's judicial philosophy, as put forth in legal papers released by the National Archives." - They wrote it

Mind you, he hasn't answered one question from a Senator yet. A shocker: "ACLU Concerned O’Connor Replacement Will Roll Back Vital Civil Liberties Protections" - Just one more fix...

It is getting to a point where a pro-choice, maximum civil liberties guy like me looks like a nut job before I can even explain my position. The rhetoric is getting insane:

"Nominee should explain position on global warming."

"Nominee seen smoking dope with the anti-Christ in Vatican courtyard."

"Roberts thought to be against happiness."

Ok, Ok. I made up the last three, but the point should be clear. Then in the midst of the grief, growing alarm, paralyzing fear, abundant horror, MASS HYSTERIA, comes this from the ever reliably conservative NEW YORK TIMES:

"Court Nominee Advised Group on Gay Rights" READ THE COMPLETE ARTICLE.

Ladies and Gentlemen, you may now remove the knots from your undershorts and breathe freely again. Oh for Pete's sake, he helped develop a winning strategy for a Gay Rights Group and gave instructions in a moot court. Think the Vatican OK'd that one? Relax and enjoy your weekend. Unless you're on the Religious Right. I have some antacids around here somewhere. Send an email and I'll send you some right away.

Posted by Bill Turner at 9:14 PM EDT

Updated: August 5, 2005 10:57 PM EDT

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink