Presentation Zen on Teaching

Presentation Zen is a great site for anyone who has to present on anything. For instance, I have trials, hearing, and appeals, and so I try to keep abreast of the best ideas in this field. But then, what field doesn't require some communicating & teaching? Anyway, this one is worth repeating. Garr (Mr. Presentation Zen) notes the excellent work of Sir Ken Robinson, and Dr. Tae. I watched the whole of Dr. Tae's presentation. He's a physics professor @ Northwestern. What he says about school really applies in a lot of areas of education, although in a humanities and social sciences curriculum you have a different way to engage in the classroom. Engagement and personal effort at understanding and learning are keys to any field. His demonstration of learning a new skate board move is fun to watch, including his responses to failures. Not your staid academic!

Wise or Crazy? Interesting Thoughts from Nassim Taleb

If nothing else--and I think he provides a lot of insight--NT gives us something to think about. In the brief written piece, he prognosticates, always a dangerous undertaking. Is he a hedgehog or fox (a la Phillip Tetlock)? In this taped interview also the The Economist, he talks about his new main idea: "anti-fragility". An interesting concept indeed.

Freeman Dyson & the Hubris of Humankind

I read this article with great interest, as I'd known of Dyson's skeptical attitude towards global climate change (or more accurately called, I think, "global weirding"), and I know of his genius. This article tries to make sense of his position. The header sets the tone of the article:

In the range of his genius, Freeman Dyson is heir to Einstein--a visionary who has reshaped thinking in fields from math to astrophysics o medicine, and who has conceived nuclear-propelled spaceships designed to transport human colonists to distant planets. And yet on the matter of global warming he is, as an outspoken skeptic dead wrong: wrong on the facts, wrong on the science. How could someone as smart as Dyson be so dumb about the environment? The answer lies in his almost religious faith in the power of man and science to bring nature to heel.

The author, Kenneth Brower, I might add, knows Dyson and has obvious admiration and appreciation of Dysons's skills and merits. This is not a hatchet job, but a carefully considered assessment of Dyson's peculiar attitude. In the end, Brower believes that Dyson is (almost literally) a man of the cosmos, and not a mere terrestrial being.

However, the article really caught my attention because, like my comments on Matt Ridley's The Rational Optimist, I'm skeptical of humankind's ability to tame Nature. In this perspective, I am a skeptic and conservative. I'm conservative in the Burkean sense, except that I'm less skeptical about social change than I am about environmental change (or better yet, I see social change as a species of environmental change). Burke didn't have to address the huge environmental changes that industrialization has wrought since his lifetime. To compare to a more contemporary figure, as far as the environment is concerned, I side more with the perspective of Nassim Taleb, who, I believe, shares a very cautious attitude toward the environment, as well as toward financial and economic systems. Also, Thomas Homer-Dixon has also written about what could be our Ingenuity Gap. As Brower writes, we have lots of technological schemes to address global climate change, and they're very pie-in-the-sky (or something in the sky or the ocean, etc.). We don't even have a public that thinks we have a problem, whether caused by humans or not.

This leads to my last thought: reading Morris's Why the West Rules--For Now, which goes back to the earliest humans, we have survived, but it often seems we did so despite ourselves. Since I'm listening to a Jack Kornfield recording currently, speaking of the Buddhist perspective of innate goodness, I want to believe that, and I do believe we have some grounds for this perspective. However, I also have my inner Calvinist (hey, my dad was a Presbyterian!). Frankly, the weight of the evidence is against us. Take Exhibit A, Dyson, a genius of incredible stature, seems really out to lunch on this crucial issue. If he's out to lunch, where are we mortals? Well, perhaps something less than genius intelligence--or a different array of multiple intelligences--is rather a good thing. Anyway, we fiddle while Earth burns. Are we the Nero species? How on earth (pun intended) can we change this? Advice welcome.

Ian Ayres: Short Attention Spans?

I found this an interesting blog post. I'd listened to his book Super Crunchers!, and he teaches what is probably the best law school currently in the U.S. Anyway, I do wonder about the electronic phenomena and how it may affect our ability to concentrate and focus. I know, I know, here I am making a short blog post, and I certainly read them. But still, we do have to be careful. Remember: you crap-detector must be on 24-7. Anyway, this post and the couple of others that he cites to are very thought provoking.

Check out this related post, and this one.

More Stephen Walt on American Foreign Policy: Too Much Security or Too Much Insecurity

Stephen Walt furthers an argument that I posted about the other day. He responds to a very thoughtful comment in The Economist that addresses neocon ideas (or as the article puts it, "magical thinking")about national security. The Economist article is very thoughtful as well. Walt says that they both have a point: we are too secure, but not nearly as secure as we think we are. I'd say our weaknesses aren't military, they're perceptual and long-term. If you follow foreign policy, these posts are very pertinent to things like the START treaty and Afghanistan.

Robert Wright on Afghanistan: Worse than Viet Nam

Robert Wright's article in the NYT today sets forth a distinct case against continued military operations in Afghanistan. I note that he cites the Afghan Study Group report in the postscript of his article, and I heard member Michael Hoh speak last week at the Iowa City Foreign Relations Council. I am becoming more and more pessimistic about this whole enterprise: a drain on lives, morale, and treasure--for what? I want to give President Obama the benefit of the doubt on all of this, but how long can we sit quietly? The big difference from Viet Nam, of course, is the lack of widespread resistance to the war at home. Since the sons and daughters of the middle class aren't going to war, we see no widespread protests. And, not wanting to repeat the shameful treatment given to many Viet Nam vets by the nation, we want to be very careful not to harm the brave men and women who serve. Be certain: the domestic resistance the Viet Nam war caused a great deal of havoc and really hurt the nation, as did the war itself. Cool heads don't prevail in times of war, which is one reason that war is poison for democracy. It may be a necessary poison, but it should be suffered only when absolutely necessary and in the very smallest possible dose.

We need to make some hard strategic decisions here. I think that it's time for me to write my congressional representatives. What do you think?

Niall Ferguson on the West & China: Past, Present, and Future

This article really deals with two topics. First, how "the West" came to such a great lead in development over Asia, and second, how that's now changing very quickly. The first question about the history of development is one that I'm reading about currently in Ian Morris's Why the West Rules--for Now: The Patterns of History, and What They Reveal About the Future , a very extensive history of human development from paleolithic times to the present and into the future. Very good, but more about it later. ( Ferguson gave it a shout out in this review in Foreign Affairs.) The second part of Ferguson's article deals with current developments. This, too, is fascinating, as we're seeing a new challenge to U.S. and Western leadership. How we address these issues will prove a real challenge to our leadership.

Thomas Barnett on the U.S. and China--Again

This was too good to pass up. Let me provide my executive summary of his key points (i.e., points that I find persuasive):

1. We act in a passive-aggressive manner toward China and many nations. Get over it.
2. We have overlapping interests with the Chinese, and, Oh, yeah!, the rest of the world. We have to work on these relationships. As someone who deals with negotiations and conflicting interests regularly, the need to negotiate relationships is fundamental. The sticking point is the audience (client, voters) whom you have to please, your clients, so to speak. But you have to cut a deal (if you can) even if its with potential (or actual) rivals. It's called leadership.
3. We must accept some "satisficing" (Herbert Simon). This is, we have to expect less-than-perfect outcomes. That's life as we know it. The enemy of the good is the best (or something like that).
4. The idea of a nuke-free world, as attractive as it is, overreaches, at least at present. We need to move to a nuclear-limited world. (See my prior entry for some sanity on that topic.)
5. Real politics involves "consensus building", but also deal-making. Sometimes you have to make deals with the devil (e.g., FDR & Churchill dealt with Stalin to defeat Hitler; Clinton cut deals with Newt Gingrich).
6. Strategic thinking involves a lot more than thinking about war. I suggest that it's all about energy. Not just oil, but money (fungible energy) and attention (human energy), but that's a whole different post.

 Barnett makes some important points here.

Walt: Too Secure? A Message to the Senate

I may just send this link to my U.S. senators, especially Senator Grassley, whom I fear may be playing the anything-to-defeat-Obama tune that many, if not most, Senate Republicans seem willing to play. How sad!

The Republican attitude here gives us an understanding of what "playing politics" means. First, it means trying to gain electoral advantage and ignoring the real work of political decision-making. Because most voters can be fooled by posturing, or really believe in the posture taken, Republicans can claim the need for a "strong defense", when in fact, as Walt argues, it goes the other way. Second, the "playing" in "playing politics" demonstrates a childishness in the actions taken. Of course, both sides do it on occasion, but we expect--or should expect--most to rise above it.* I don't have a problem with genuine differences of opinion and perception, but many instances we're seeing either intentional cynincism or group delusion at work.

*Play can be a good thing for adults, I should add. I play--volleyball, basketball, etc.--all the time. I go to "plays", but this is different.)

Nic Marks on The Happiness Index

C & I watched several TED Talks tonight, and I thought I'd share on this one. If you can't watch it, I'll give you the executive summary. Mr. Marks says that five factors govern happiness:
1. Connect with others
2. Keep active
3. Take notice of the world around you
4. Keep learning
5. Give

You can go to this website to learn more.

If you stop and think about these factors, they reflect a great deal of wisdom and they are factors well-represented in religious and wisdom traditions. Too often we forget them, especially in our race for wealth and consumer goods. A very worthwhile talk.

Walt & Colleagues: Cut Defense Budget

Stephen Walt and other foreign policy realists, among others, are saying the plainly obvious: we have to cut the defense budget in order to get our national fiscal house in order. When it seems the nation is completely daft on this issues, it's reassuring to see those who think most deeply on this topic speak some sense. One only hopes that the newly minted deficit hawk Republicans pay attention to this.

Krugman Trumps Brooks

I go with Krugman on this, and I think Brooks does have it backwards, although the tendency in general for economists to go overboard in their faith in models may cross the fresh water--salt water divide. I think that the economists who speak and write in languages primarily other than math will have the best perspectives. I take this position not because I'm anti-math (I'm not) nor because I'm not fluent in math (which is true: I'm not). No, I think that the danger arises from an inflated sense of certainty that the use of mathematical models may create. Keynes was a brilliant mathematician, but check out The General Theory: it's written in English. Ditto The Wealth of Nations. Also, the market (fresh water) economists seem most enamored by market models and models of rational man [sic]. No, I think that Brooks could write the same column even more accurately aimed at so-called conservative economists. For instance, those who predict the end of the world with QE2. No, I have to side with Krugman on this one, plus he has a well-honed argument that the stimulus simply wasn't large enough because Obama bowed too easily to Congressional skittishness.

Tyler Cowen's Best Books of the Year

Marginal Revolution has some interesting stuff, and Cowen is an eclectic and discerning reader. I can only claim to have read Winston's War by Max Hastings, which I found excellent. Some of the others I've read reviews of, and they sound very good. I love a good book list!

Spoiler Alert: Don' Spoil Your Two Hours on Morning Glory

To be blunt, Morning Glory was a waste of time. I can't say much good about it. If you've seen the trailer, you've seen anything that might constitute a high point.

However, let's give some thought to this film nevertheless. My thought arose from the premise of the film that the character played (really, over-played) by Harrison Ford should lighten up and get into the froth of morning TV. He is portrayed as a pompous former anchorman who wants to do "real" news. During the course of the film, our heroine, young, perky, and determined Rachel McAdams transforms by show by various antics: an anchor kissing a frog, the weatherman televised on a roller-coaster, and other inanities. And the only "real" news that occurs in this endless film comes when the sitting governor is confronted with criminal charges right before the cops show up to arrest him. This isn't news, it's a spectacle of humiliation (even if he is guilty, which no one is assumed to care about after viewing the bust). Television news becomes more and more of a wasteland all the time from what I can see (which is as little as possible beyond the Daily Show and the Colbert Report). But as much as one naturally pulls for Rachel McAdams to succeed, I kept thinking that success isn't worth it. What have you done? She gets the guy in the end, but by the end, your really don't care.

My review mixes two types of criticism, bad movie-making and bad journalism, but if you choose to go, you're forewarned.

David Frum: Good Conservative?

As a former Bush speechwriter, I never expected to like David Frum. I guess we all have our prejudices, and one of mine is George W. Bush. However, this article by Frum in the the NYT Magazine yesterday really struck me as some very good advice. He caught me with the opening truth of his first paragraph: the Democrats won in 2008 because of the economy, and the Republicans won in 2010 because of the economy. It's really that simple. Beyond that, he recognizes the value of the welfare state (picking a fine G.K. Chesterton saying along the way to makes his point); he talks about the need for Republicans (and Democrats) to take off their ideological blinders, and most importantly, he shared this insight about populism that I think really captures a great deal about our current (and much of our past) politics. About the populist divide, he writes:

American populism has almost always concentrated its anger against the educated rather than the wealthy. So much so that you might describe contemporary American politics as a class struggle between those with more education than money against those with more money than education: Jon Stewart’s America versus Bill O’Reilly’s, Barack Obama versus Sarah Palin.

Digging back in memory, this fits with theories of Richard Hofstadter and perhaps Robert Wiebe, whose works I read as an undergraduate, or shortly after. The Tea Party phenomena has been the most interesting and scary item to watch of late. Intellectually, it's incoherent, as Frum recognizes, but it captures feelings, and feelings are much, much stronger than ideas. In thinking about our recent Iowa Supreme Court election vote, I was struck by the attitude of resentment expressed more than the anti-gay aspect. VanderPlats didn't do any overt gay-bashing, he couched his argument in terms of "elites" and "activist judges" "re-writing the Constitution". This is the real problem. The problem of crowds, the uneducated, the demos, the mob, and so on. When do we move from a democracy to a tyranny of the many? The Greeks, like Aristotle and Plato, understood the downside of democracy, and as I learn more, I gain a greater appreciation of their concerns (although I still don't buy any alternative).

Getting back to Frum, it's a really thoughtful piece. Here! Here! to more conservatives like him.

Thomas Barnett on the U.S. and China

As I often find, Dr. Thomas Barnett has something interesting to say about the contemporary world. In this case, the growing rift between the U.S. and China. Each nation has its own particular needs, strengths, and weaknesses, and both need each other for continued peace and prosperity. I fear growing Chinese nationalism, but I also fear an increasingly confrontational attitude by the U.S. As Barnett notes, China has a rather unique demographic challenge, one that makes ours seem small. We have to work with their needs if they're going to work with ours. I hope that this and following administrations act out of our long-term interest toward China not out of domestic political expediency.

Ganga White: Yoga Beyond Belief

This is another book that I finished recently, and very different from the LeCarre. White is a long-time yoga practitioner (check out some of the 60's and 70's hair he used to have!). This book was really quite an excellent general introduction to the practice of the Hatha Yoga tradition. White addresses all manner of issues in a very accessible prose. It covers a wide variety of topics that any practitioner, new or experienced, will likely face. He also goes into some of he history of the discipline. If you're interested in learning more about yoga, this is a good place to begin.

John LeCarre's A Most Wanted Man

I finished this novel recently. I am very much a LeCarre fan, so the anticipation is always great. I'd rate this novel as good, but not great. It's an enjoyable read. The young lawyer dealing with the demands and aspirations of her profession, the aging banker, and the various Muslims living in Germany, all are characters that intrigue. Add in LeCarre's understanding of the world of espionage and police work--and all of the conflict and rivalry that you have in that milieu--and you get a very compelling tale. Not as complex or deep as some of his past efforts, but nonetheless compelling. If you enjoy a good, contemporary realistic novel that focuses on current events, then you can't do much better than this.

Dave Brooks on the Deficit Reduction Commission

Dave Brooks takes a look at this issue from the big picture, and he makes important points. While Krugman goes for the details, Brooks does a good job of trying to see the big picture. I wold hasten to note, however, the Krugman has expressed a very real appreciation of the danger of the deficit, and he's not moved by the fear of bond markets that Brooks, like Niall Ferguson,share. Both express a fear of market collapse. Nonetheless, I think Brooks joins the debate. In the end, to reduce this deficit, we're going to have to do some things differently. Cut defense spending significantly would be a great start. Maintaining slightly higher taxes on the wealthiest would also be fine by me. Ending breaks for economic interests that don't serve the general welfare would work for me. A higher retirement age for Social Security? Perhaps for some. Anyway, we should engage in a vigorous public debate on these issues and take steps to reduce the deficit, but not by hurting those at the lowest end of the economic spectrum.

Krugman on the Deficit Reduction Commission

This link is to Krugman's take on the deficit reduction commission. Krugman, as usual, cuts to the chase and criticizes aggressively where he thinks it's warranted. I really applaud this. We all have to serve as advocates for what we believe is right. N.B., this doesn't mean that we act like jerks toward one another, but neither must we cower at the prospect of conflict.

My next post is of Dave Brooks today: read and compare.

Robert Kaplan on Obama's Asian Tour & Strategic Balancing

This article by Kaplan in the NYT today is an interesting one. We are living through a period of rising new global powers, especially China, but also India, Turkey, and Brazil, among others. How the reigning hegemon, the U.S., reacts to these changes is a major challenge to U.S. leaders. Can we accommodate and reach a working understanding with the new players, or will we panic and try to spend all of them under the table? The latter was the Bush administration plan until 9/11 sent us scurrying off to Afghanistan and Iraq. It does seem that the rise of China poses many of the same challenges for the U.S. that the rise of Germany did for Great Britain at the beginning of this century. Let hope it all works out better than that relationship did.

Of course, one may ask if there is an alternative to all of this balancing of forces and such, and the answer is probably "no". However, as we pour lives and resources into Iraq and Afghanistan, can we afford an active role in all of this?

Be Afraid? Glen Beck on George Soros: Echos of the Past?

I don't know what to make of Glen Beck. I want to think of him as an ignorant, albeit malevolent, clown. However, this piece from The Daily Dish takes my wishful thinking to task. How do we, how should we, respond to what seems to be a real anti-Semitic tirade? Is he really so ignorant that he doesn't know that he's echoing the archetypes of anti-Semitic slander? Do we ignore him? And if not, how does one respond? One has to doubt the efficacy of rational argument in the face of such nonsense? Like the crazies from Kansas, I want to ignore them, I don't want to feed their hatred mixed with a need for attention; however, neither should such statements or prejudices go unchallenged. This is a real dilemma, certainly for anyone who considers oneself any kind of a liberal (at least as it relates to free speech).

Guess What? The Wealtier Live Longer

Well, if money can't buy you love, it certainly improves your chances for a longer life. Like a good deal of social science, this only makes sense when you stop and think about it. It's hardly counter-intuitive. The point Krugman wants to make is that making all workers wait longer for retirement penalizes those in the lower half of the income bracket. For lawyers, for instance, we should be able to work longer than coal miners or steel workers, and farmers for that matter (although I know farmers who pretty much died on the tractor).

Nick Morgan & Herbert Watzke on the Brain in Our Gut

Nick Morgan writes on public speaking and presentation, and I regularly read his blog. Besides his sound advice, he sometimes puts on examples, and TED Talks provide a fertile source. This talk is about research on the "gut" and how it works as a part of our nervous system. As C and I have both been reading on brain research for our respective professional reasons, I found it interesting. It's quite an enjoyable and informative presentation.

Some Good News (Maybe) About the American People

Stephen Walt points out that the American public aren't buying Bush. Walt points out that few watched Bush's big interview with Matt Lauer. I hope Walt's right. However, I did see that someone claimed to have a poll that showed Bush beating Obama in a mock presidential contest. Since this is not a real contest, maybe the respondents were just mocking the poll-takers and poll-readers. I hope so. Right now, I'm a bit down on the electorate (i.e., those who voted Republican). The other explanation is that instead of watching Bush most folks watched some other junk on TV. There's lots of competition for brain drain on the tube.

More Quotes from Loy's The World of Stories

The following are more quotes taken from the Loy book. I have yet to right a proper review of it, and I plan to do so. But I find the quotes intriguing as stand alone thought starters. Anyway, for your casual consideration:

Without a foundation in conventional truth,
The significance of the ultimate truth cannot be taught.
Without understanding the significance of the ultimate truth,
Liberation is not achieved.
--Nagarjuna

The literary language of the New Testament is not intended, like literature itself, simply to suspend judgment, but to convey a vision of spiritual life that continues to transform and expand our own. That is myths become, as purely literary myths cannot, myths to live by; its metaphors become, as purely literary metaphors cannot, metaphors to live in.
--Northrup Frye

Absolutely unmixed attention is prayer.
--Simone Weil

Attentiveness is the natural prayer of the soul.
--Nicholas Malebranche

Let your mind come forth without fixing it anywhere.
--Diamond Sutra

There is no specifiable difference whatever
between nirvana and samsara.
The limit of nirvana is the limit of samsara.
There is not even the subtlest difference between the two.
--Nagarjuna

We make stories because we are story.
--Russell Hoban

The reality of cosmos becomes a story to be told by the man who participates responsively in the story told by the god.
--Eric Voegelin

The eye I see God with is the eye God sees me with; my and God’s eye are one eye, one seeing, one knowing and one love.
--Meister Eckhart

The soul’s vision of its divine Lord is the vision which He has of the soul.
--Ibn ‘Arabi

Man is a rope stretched between the animal and the superman—a rope over an abyss. A dangerous crossing, a dangerous wayfaring, a dangerous looking-back, a dangerous trembling and halting.
--Nietzsche

Literature is the Imaginal in script.
--Northrup Frye

“I feel as if I was inside a song, if you get my meaning.”
--Sam Gamgee, in The Lord of the Rings by J.R.R. Tolkein

The East emphasizes liberation from the human condition, while the Western spiritual traditions place special value on the human incarnation in its own right, and are more interesting in fulfilling the meaning of this incarnation than in going beyond it or in finding release from it . . . to bring these two together is an important evolutionary step.
--John Welwood

David Loy's The World is Made of Stories

This book by David Loy will get a fuller treatment later. It was a delight to read, and it requires further digestion. However, one thing makes it quite fun: its numerous quotes spread throughout the text. Delicious little bits of thought. I've written some of my favorites for your delectation. (However, don't let these substitute for reading the book!)

The universe is made of stories, not atoms.
Muriel Rukeheyser

The limits of my language are the limits of my world.
Ludwig Wittgenstein

The Greek polis was formed by warriors coming back from the Trojan Wars. They needed a place to tell their stories, because it was only in the stories that they achieved immortality. Democracy was created to make the world safe for stories.
Ernest Becker

Reality is what doesn’t go away when you stop believing in it.
Phillip K. Dick

No dharma has ever been taught by a buddha to anyone, anywhere.
Nagarjuna

Whereof we cannot speak, thereof we must be silent.
Ludwig Wittgenstein

To the native Irish, the literal representation of the country was less important than its poetic dimension. In traditional bardic culture, the terrain was studied, discussed, and referenced; every place had its legend and its own identity . . . . What endured was the mythic landscape, providing escape and inspiration.
R.K. Foster

Just as the flower is made of non-flower elements, the self is made only of non-self elements.
Thich Nhat Hanh

The sense of the world must be outside the world.
Ludwig Wittgenstein

Storytelling reveals meaning without committing the error of defining it.
Hannah Arendt

Myth is not entertainment, but rather the crystallization of experience, and far from being escapist literature, fantasy is an intensification of reality.
Alan Garner

What does our great historical hunger signify, our clutching about us of countless other cultures, our consuming desire for knowledge, if not the loss of myth, or a mythic home, the mythic womb?
Nietzsche

Theology is a branch of fantastic literature.
Jorge Luis Borges

Fantasy is true, of course. It isn’t factural, but it is true. Children know that. Adults know it too, and that is precisely why many of them are afraid of fantasy. They know that its truth challenges, even threatens, all that is phony, unnecessary, and trivial in the life they have let themselves be forced into living.
Ursula K. LeGuin

One does not refute symbols; one deciphers them.
Henri Corbin

She kept asking if the stories were true.
I kept asking her if it mattered.
We finally gave up.
She was looking for a place to stand
& I wanted a place to fly.
Brian Anderson

The only secure truth men have is that which they themselves create and dramatize; to live is to play at the meaning of life.
Ernest Becker

We accept reality easily, perhaps because we sense that nothing is real.
Jorge Luis Borges

Our truth consists of illusions that we have forgotten are illusions.
Nietzsche

I plan on more to come!

Statement from Ousted Iowa Supreme Court Justices

The following (except for the very last line)is the press release by the ousted Iowa Supreme Court justices. A very thoughtful and appropriate response that bears repeating:

November 3, 2010
The following public statement was issued by Justice David Baker, Justice Michael Streit and Chief Justice Marsha Ternus.

Des Moines, November 3, 2010— It has been our great privilege to serve the people of Iowa as justices on the Iowa Supreme Court. Throughout our judicial service, we have endeavored to fulfill our duty to Iowans by always adhering to the rule of law, making decisions fairly and impartially according to law, and faithfully upholding the constitution.

We thank all of the Iowans who voted to retain judges around the state for another term. Your support shows that many of our citizens value fair and impartial courts. We also want to acknowledge and thank all the Iowans, from across the political spectrum and from different walks of life, who worked tirelessly over the past few months to defend Iowa's high-caliber court system against an unprecedented attack funded by out-of-state special interest groups.
Iowa's merit selection system helps ensure that our judges base their decisions on the law and the Constitution and nothing else. Ultimately, however, the preservation of our fair and impartial courts will require more than the integrity and fortitude of individual judges; it will require the fervent and steadfast support of the people.

To which I say "Amen!"

Thoughts After the Election

The following are random thoughts on the election yesterday, which, for the most part, reflects my disappointment and despair, although not much in the way of surprise.

Iowa is a conservative state. Not a Republican state, but a conservative state. We don’t go easily for change. Only one incumbent, Democrat or Republican on the statewide or federal ticket, was defeated. The defeated incumbent, Chet Culver, was replaced by a man who previously served sixteen years in the job! Also, note that both U.S. senators, one an old school Republican and the other a liberal Democrat, have both held office nearly forever. The great exception to this, of course, is the defeat of our three Supreme Court justices who were selected at random to be (figuratively) executed as an example to other judges not to drag Iowans into the 21st century. They dragged Iowa into the future when they ruled that our fundamental law requires the state to extend the benefits of marriage to gays. I don’t take these results as especially homophobic (although in some measure this is certainly true), but it does reflect a deep-seated conservatism and resentment. The resentment is seen by comparing results from Johnson and other larger Iowa counties with the more rural and poorer western counties, where voters more likely supported the summary executions for their audacity.

The electorate, taken as a whole, seems more and more like a petulant child that stomps its foot when it doesn’t get what it wants when it wants it. In 2008 it went center-left (Obama is nothing if not a centrist), and now it wants to veer sharply to the right. This makes no sense. Clotaire Rapaille in The Culture Code suggests that the U.S. is an adolescent country, and I bristled a bit at that, but I think this election demonstrates the truth of his contention. People are unhappy because Obama and the Congress couldn’t deliver a miracle, because that’s what it would have taken to undo the Bush mess. Of course, this may be endemic to democracy. Look at the French, unhappy that they can’t keep early retirement. Sorry, folks, we’re living too long and have too many bills! So maybe this crazy inconsistency is attributable to democracy anywhere and not just in the U.S.

Democracy, as we practice it today, isn’t so great. I happened to read about Socrates and his death at the hands of an Athenian jury again this morning. It struck me: a democracy put to death a good man (and one we’d label a great man) because he questioned the local pieties and prejudices. Next to Jesus and perhaps St. Paul, Socrates holds the greatest sway over Western culture, yet he died at the hands of a democracy, at the direction of the popular will. There are much worse systems of government out there, all worse in some way, but let’s not think that our contemporary U.S. democracy is so great. It gets by. It does so despite degrading the level of public discourse. Consider many of the television commercials aired: they insult the intelligence; they either lie outright or seek to deceive. This goes for both parties, although I honestly think that Republicans are better at it and more comfortable with it. Are unflattering images and less than complete sentences what we should base our decisions upon?

The bad news is, in some view, good news. The fickle electorate will change likely. Remember 1994. Maureen Dowd’s column today serves as a reminder of how the more things change the more that they stay the same. One can only hope that Republicans will remain as foolish. Obama should not be finished. He just needs to play the game adeptly and aggressively. Clinton did and won despite his personal shortcomings. I just hope that not too much damage gets done in the mean time.