« November 2004 | Main | January 2005 »
By visiting Australia I step a few hours forward into the future and wish you a Happy New Year from 2005.
The closing lines of Rosa Luxemburg: A Life by Elzbieta Ettinger:
Driven by an urge to live a complete life, Rosa Luxemburg left her country, her home, her family. She sought to make the lives of all people complete, worth living, even though she knew that we are "like the Jews, being led by Moses through the desert."A good 2005 to all.
See this statement from the Iraqi Federation of Trade Unions on terrorist attacks against Iraqi rail workers. And also this.
Three of Iraq's most extreme Sunni Islamist groups warned Iraqis yesterday not to vote in next month's elections and threatened to kill anyone who took part.A statement, posted on the website of the Ansar al-Sunna group and co-signed by the Islamic Army in Iraq and the Army of the Mujahideen, told Iraqis not to take part in "the farce of democracy and elections". It said: "Anyone who accepts to take part in this dirty farce will not be safe."
The statement described democracy as "un-Islamic" and polling stations as "centres of atheism".
LabourStart has a round-up of the global trade union response to the earthquake disaster.
It's reported in the Guardian today:
Members of the British public had donated more than £30m for the victims of the tsunami disaster by last night, the speed and generosity of the response amazing charity bosses.But it doesn't matter what the circumstances, or how terrible the disaster, someone's got to be in the wrong somewhere; we've got to be able to take a swipe in some direction. So the paper's leader writer unloads this little item:The reaction to the appeal was described as "unprecedented" - never has so much money been given over such a short period.
[P]erhaps the brutal answer to an impressive display of empathy and charity is that wealthy westerners only really notice distant disasters when wealthy westerners are themselves caught up in them.Oh, really? Would that unprecedented reaction - to the tune of more than £30m - have been forthcoming if it had been a few dozen British tourists who had died; or not have been forthcoming if there had been no British or European dead among the victims? I think it wouldn't and would have been forthcoming, respectively.
There's a companion piece by Jeremy Seabrook which starts in similar vein and gets worse:
As in all natural disasters, the victims are overwhelmingly the poorest.It was only a matter of time before this awful disaster came to be appropriated for the favoured political cause of the moment. Strange, isn't it, how the ruins of Galle and Bandar Aceh don't here call forth images of Halabja or of the mass graves of Saddam Hussein's Iraq. This is rank stuff.This time there was something different. The tsunami struck resorts where westerners were on holiday. For the western media, it was clear that their lives have a different order of importance from those that have died in thousands, but have no known biography, and, apparently, no intelligible tongue in which to express their feelings. This is not to diminish the trauma of loss of life, whether of tourist or fisherman. But when we distinguish between "locals" who have died and westerners, "locals" all too easily becomes a euphemism for what were once referred to as natives. Whatever tourism's merits, it risks reinforcing the imperial sensibility.
For this sensibility has already been reawakened by all the human-made, preventable catastrophes. The ruins of Galle and Bandar Aceh called forth images of Falluja, Mosul and Gaza.
Artie Shaw has died:
Shaw was one of the most lyrical and creative clarinetists in jazz. A virtuoso with a singing tone distinctly his own, his sense of structure, phrasing and shading made his improvised melodies often seem like fully formed compositions.If you don't know Artie Shaw and want an introductory impression of his playing, try his rendition of Hoagy Carmichael's 'Star Dust'. And don't neglect to catch Billie Holiday on 'Any Old Time', while you're about it.Shaw was a restless and adventurous artist who refused to repeat earlier successes. He formed a series of outstanding and innovative bands noted for their orchestral richness, cohesion and swing. But he disbanded some at the height of their success or a few months after forming them.
He grew bored playing the same tunes again and again and became increasingly frustrated by the public's demand for his old hits and lack of enthusiasm for his current work. He moved in and out of the public eye for a decade before he quit music for good in 1954 to write literature.
Donald Sensing lives in Franklin, Tenn., not far from his hometown of Nashville. He graduated from Wake Forest University with a BA in philosophy and obtained his M.Div. from Vanderbilt Divinity School in 1999. In between, he served as a US Army field artillery officer, retiring in 1995. Don has been married since 1980 and has three children; the eldest is a US Marine, the other two are still in school. As an Army officer, he served on four continents and was a plans officer assigned to Headquarters, Dept. of the Army at the Pentagon. He served as well on the travelling staff of the Secretary of the Army. His second career is as an ordained minister (elder) of the United Methodist Church, where he is pastor of Trinity UMC, Franklin. Don blogs at One Hand Clapping.
Why do you blog? > I blog better to understand the world and what is happening in it. In many ways, blogging is a form of self-talk for me. I think best when I'm writing, and blogging is how I think about the important topics of the day. Although I am gratified that two million-plus people have now read my site, I really am writing for myself more than anyone else.
What has been your best blogging experience? > Like many bloggers, the first thrill was getting my first Instalanche, back in March 2002. The blogosphere was still pretty small then, and that Instalanche yielded 1,700 hits. Back then that was huge! The most gratifying experience was being asked by OpinionJournal's James Taranto to write an op-ed for the WSJ site last March. He had read one of my posts and asked me to submit it for publication on his site. It may be read here. I also get a fairly steady stream of email from readers telling me how much they like my work, and that's very satisfying.
What has been your worst blogging experience? > When I decided to quit after only three months of blogging. The hit counter I was using then said I was garnering an extremely small number of readers, some days in the single digits. So I simply posted that blogging was suspended indefinitely. Shortly, Geitner Simmons emailed me to persuade me otherwise. After a few weeks I restarted, that time on Blogspot (I now have my own server), and have been blogging ever since. Geitner and I became good friends, too. So the low blogging moment was supplanted by some very positive things.
What would be your main blogging advice to a novice blogger? > Write for fun and write about what you already know. Keep at it, but remember that if you write simply for others to read, you'll probably quit. Please yourself first. Gaining readers is really a bonus, although a very nice bonus. Don't be afraid to ask big-time bloggers to look at your work, but, as Glenn Reynolds once wrote, 'Sell the post, not a blog.' Send the text of a post to other bloggers, not just a link. And include the link, of course; I prefer it plaintext rather than text-embedded.
What are your favourite blogs? > Other than Instapundit, the Grand Central Station of the blogosphere, I enjoy American Digest for reflections, Bill Hobbs for Tennessee news and analysis and Belmont Club for foreign affairs insights. I really want to mention Braden Files, too, an outstanding site with a very small readership, but always worth the time.
Who are your intellectual heroes? > Aristotle, Thomas Aquinas, Galileo, Thomas Jefferson, John Wesley.
What are you reading at the moment? > Holy War, a History of the Crusades, by Karen Armstrong. It's a bit of an ideological treatment of the subject, and I think she is stretching in the extent of her claims that the Crusades strongly influence the West's relationship with the Middle East today. Nonetheless, it's an informative work.
What is your favourite movie? > Gone With the Wind. What man doesn't secretly wish he was Rhett Butler?
What is your favourite song? > All my favourites are hymns. If I had to name one it would be, 'And Can It Be that I Should Gain', by Charles Wesley, 1739 (United Methodist Hymnal #363). But there are dozens of others I could name as well. At this time of year 'Silent Night' is my seasonal favourite.
Who is your favourite composer? > Don Michael Dicie, the music director of my church. He's incredibly talented and is published by Oxford. We co-wrote an Easter offertory this year (he wrote the music, of course) and it was a wonderful experience. He and I are closely aligned theologically and in how music and word should interplay during worship, making it a real joy to lean on his vast knowledge and expertise to plan worship. Start with his Googled results.
Can you name a major moral, political or intellectual issue on which you've ever changed your mind? > I am much more liberal theologically than I was before seminary, but I lean politically toward conservative libertarianism. I am much more open than before to the historical and cultural influences on how the Bible was shaped and written as well as how those influences shape how we use the Scriptures. When I was young I tended toward Scriptural stringency, but studying Wesleyan theology loosened me up a great deal.
What philosophical thesis do you think it most important to disseminate? > 'The God who gave us life gave us liberty at the same time. The hand of force may destroy but cannot disjoin them' - Thomas Jefferson.
What philosophical thesis do you think it most important to combat? > Statism, the idea that government has the final say in the ordering of the life of a nation's citizens.
What commonly enjoyed activities do you regard as a waste of time? > Nintendo, Gameboy and the like.
If you could effect one major policy change in the governing of your country, what would it be? > Both major parties are now wholly converted to Big Government, therefore both parties have become anti-freedom. Both parties see America as a problem to be solved and Americans as a people to be managed. Hence our lives are being regulated at a compounding rate. We are well on our way to thinking that statism is the norm. Somehow we must reverse this process.
What would you do with the UN? > The UN is so bloated, so corrupt, so outdated and so anti-freedom that I don't see how it can be useful again. Neither am I sure it can, or should, be replaced with another organization. There are a lot of good things UN agencies do that don't get a lot of press. The challenge is how to preserve them while burning the chaff - and there's an awful lot of chaff. One place to start is by purging every UN official who had anything to do with the Oil-for-Food scandal. Annan has to go, too. The old Rooseveltian idealism with which the UN was begun is no longer tenable. Today the UN is a tool of despots and dictators. The first-world member states must regain control of the UN and use it to bring forth more freedom across the globe. But Europe is quite unwilling to do that, so I don't see much of a future for the UN.
What do you consider to be the main threat to the future peace and security of the world? > At present, Islamist absolutism potentially armed with atomic weapons.
Do you think the world (human civilization) has already passed its best point, or is that yet to come? > As a man of Christian faith, I always believe that the best is yet to come. 'I know the plans I have for you, says the Lord, plans for good and not for evil, to give you a future and a hope' - Jeremiah 29:11.
What would be your most important piece of advice about life? > Follow the Golden Rule because the other side of the coin is true, too: as you treat others so you will be treated. There's an economy of life that works out so that what you get from others is closely aligned to what you have given away. Acting from kindness and love are the most important habits to develop, and also the most difficult.
What do you consider the most important personal quality? > Courage. I agree with Churchill that courage is the foundational virtue upon which all other virtues are built.
What personal fault do you most dislike? > Dishonesty. Unless someone can be trusted to be truthful, I have little use for him or her.
What do you like doing in your spare time? > Spare time? What's that? Mostly, I spend time with my wife and kids. Once my eldest entered the Marine Corps right out of high school, I realized with a jolt that my second would be gone soon, too.
What is your most treasured possession? > I really don't treasure possessions. They're just stuff. I very much value a handmade, crewel wallhanging my grandmother made me as a college-graduation present. It's irreplaceable, so I suppose that if the house caught on fire I'd grab it first, once the family was taken care of.
If you had to change your first name, what would you change it to? > When I was growing up, I hated 'Donald' (I suffered through a lot of inevitable Donald Duck jests). I wanted to be named David. But that's not very different, is it? If I had to change my first name, though, I guess I'd stick with David. Rather dull answer, eh?
What talent would you most like to have? > Athleticism. I am a very average athlete. My second son, Thomas, is athletically gifted, and the control and coordination he has over his body just amazes me. I would love to be able to do the things he does.
What would be your ideal choice of alternative profession or job? > I would be torn between something fairly scholarly, such as a full-time writer or professor, and something fairly active and outdoors, such as a national-park ranger. No, wait, I've got it! Airplane racer. Seriously. I learned to fly when I was single and therefore wealthy. I loved flying fast and low. Thankfully, my flight instructor never found out what I was doing with his airplane when I was soloing!
Who is your favourite comedian or humorist? > Jackie Gleason. His talent for humour, and especially characterization, was unparalleled.
Who are your sporting heroes? > Moe Berg, a pro-ball player whose espionage career for the US government began while he was still a player. His baseball career was not very distinguished, but his intellect and mental abilities were astonishing. (Observed a teammate, 'He can speak seven languages fluently, but he can't hit in any of them.') He carried out amazing assignments as a civilian officer of the OSS in World War II.
If you could have one (more or less realistic) wish come true, what would you wish for? > I would like to win the Grand National championship in trap shooting. Alas, it is only a wish because I have neither the time nor money to practise enough to achieve that level of skill.
How, if at all, would you change your life were you suddenly to win or inherit an enormously large sum of money? > I would give a great deal of it away, first to the United Methodist Education Fund and then to help fund medical plans for retired pastors of the Tennessee Conference of the UMC. I am medically covered myself, being retired military, but for almost every other pastor, retirement medical care is severely underfunded. For myself, I'd like a different house but not necessarily a much larger one. I'm sure I'd buy something very nice for my wife. But I don't see leaving the ministry for mere money.
If you could have any three guests, past or present, to dinner who would they be? > Moses, Jesus of Nazareth and Mohammed - the three figures who most shaped the world we live in today.
Where would you most like to live (other than where you do)? > Tennessee is landlocked while I would really like to live near the sea. I enjoy experiencing four distinct seasons, so the coasts of North Carolina, Maryland or Delaware would be nice. My wife and I really love the Outer Banks of North Carolina and my older brother lives in Delaware, so it would have to be either of those states, I suppose. We'd definitely have to have a boat large enough to take two- or three-day trips on, and a smaller speedboat for water skiing.
[The normblog profile is a weekly Friday morning feature. A list of the first 52 profiles, and the links to them, can be found here. Details of subsequent profiles are here.]
A year ago I met up with a fellow blogger, the guy who presides over one of the very best blogs there is. I'm talking, of course, about Harry. You can read about that meeting here. Well, the two of us met up again today - as chance would have it on the anniversary of our earlier get-together. That makes it a tradition already, so watch out. You'll be keen to know that this time we had a cup of tea - two cups in fact - not here, but at the Manchester City Art Gallery, before moving on to a certain well-known bookshop (but which seems not to have a decent website so I'll just use this) for a cup of coffee. So we talked again, and we talked. And I learned a very interesting fact. You'll be wishing you'd been there. When Norm met Harry, the sequel.
There has been some correspondence in the Guardian in reaction to Martin Kettle's theological question of a couple of days ago. My own convictions are secular and rationalist, and I can't say that I was swayed by any of the letters here from people of religious outlook. I am, nevertheless, uncomfortable with the follow-up letter today from Richard Dawkins. I do not quarrel with his claim that we must look to science to explain 'why the tsunami happened', and that this 'can give precious hours of warning'. But Dawkins concludes as follows:
Let's get up off our knees, stop cringing before bogeymen and virtual fathers, face reality, and help science to do something constructive about human suffering.That is where I feel a - contextual - discomfort. I can best say why by referring back to what I wrote earlier this week about the different 'modes' of speaking as an atheist on the subject of religious faith.
In an intellectual discussion about the grounds for belief in God, one may legitimately argue, with all the force one can muster, that there are no compelling grounds. On the other hand - and to put this point with particular sharpness by use of an extreme example - I wouldn't think it morally admirable to give out aggressive statements against religious belief at the funeral of someone from a devout family; or to advise a grief-stricken person against appealing to (their) God for solace.
Now, to be fair about this, in the letter in question Richard Dawkins could be seen as simply contributing to a reasoned discussion in the national press about religious faith. My own discomfort with the form of his concluding sentiments, however, is that the immediate context of that discussion is the vast tragedy that has just unfolded along the coasts of South-East Asia. It's hard to abstract what he says from the immediacy of this, from the scenes of loss and grief and suffering being relayed to us hourly. Against that background 'getting up off our knees' and 'not cringing before bogeymen and virtual fathers' have, to me, a rather brutal ring, insensitive to the complexities and vulnerabilities (final item) of the human condition.
I mean to post further on the issue in the next few days. (Amended at 12.10 AM, December 31.)
> The death toll continues to climb.
> Images of the disaster (via Gareth).
> At Malacca:
"There was a tremendous sound. We shouted to all our neighbours to run. We ran 200 metres up the hill. Behind us, trees and cylinders floated past. The village disappeared. There was nothing left," Mr James said. He added: "When I went back, I saw many hands sticking out of the sand."
> The story of a British businessman who survived with his four children, but whose wife - their mother - did not:
Fighting his own grief, Mr Willgrass then had to tell his children that their mother was dead. After telling the two eldest, he took the younger ones aside. "I just told them that mummy had gone to heaven, but I don't know whether that is the right thing to say."(See also here.)
I don't know why it is, but over the holiday period I've had a fair number of visits (via Google and other blogs that have carried items about him) to my various posts on Sidney Morgenbesser. If anyone knows why this should suddenly be, I'd be interested to hear. Anyway, whether it's connected or not, reader Tony Hutchison has pointed me to a new piece about Morgenbesser in the New York Times. Some excerpts:
[T]o anyone who visits a library to gauge his influence, Sidney Morgenbesser, who taught philosophy at Columbia University from 1955 to 1999, is practically a nonentity: the author of a small stack of seldom-cited papers, the editor of a few anthologies. Not since Socrates has a philosopher gained such a reputation for greatness while publishing so little of note. Certainly no one else shaped so many seminal thinkers while leaving behind almost nothing in the way of major doctrines or ideas. ''Moses published one book,'' Morgenbesser pleaded in his own defense. ''What did he do after that?''Amen to that.... For his peers, running into Morgenbesser meant subjecting their latest theories to his penetrating and often ruthlessly clever analysis. (''Let me see if I understand your thesis,'' he once said to the psychologist B. F. Skinner. ''You think we shouldn't anthropomorphize people?'')
... Large, sweeping theories made him suspicious. (''To explain why a man slipped on a banana peel,'' he argued, ''we do not need a general theory of slipping.'')
.....
When faced with his relentless refinements, friends and colleagues could always throw up their hands and walk away. Morgenbesser, a captive of his own talents, did not have that option.It may have looked to some like a game and to others like an affliction; in the end, though, his constant questioning was an expression of something deeper: the conviction that any product of the human imagination will almost inevitably fall short of what the world is really like. Morgenbesser was not a brute skeptic, but as a former believer who had lost and never recovered his faith, he understood that the truth was hard; hard to come by, and sometimes hard - even painful - to take.
