It's what happens when identity politics and similar theories come completely untethered from actual events where those ideas might provide some insight and turn into a religion. One wonders if there would have been a positive review had Oaks said 'this is awful but I guess we had this coming, given how we treated the Indians and all..' or if the airman chuckled as he died from radiation poisoning saying 'well this sucks for me but at least whitey got his come uppance!'
Yea I did a bit more poking around his reviews and I agree with your assessment. If I didn't know better I'd almost think it was a really well done satire.
I feel like Berlatsky's review completely misses the point of the film. It was to show how easily a small confrotation with the USSR could quickly escalate into a nuclear exchange, and honestly depict what that would look like for the average American. No heroes, just panic, desperation, and slow death from fallout for those who survived the initial blast.
I am too young to have understood The Day After when it was politically relevant. Having seen it since it does have the cheesy made for TV vibe of its era. The characters have Leave It To Beaver values which I'm pretty sure everyone on TV did until roughly the time the Simpsons became popular. That just makes it a product of its time.
Maybe Berlatsky needs to open his mind to the possibility that art can be good (and effective) without genuflecting to modern academia's various dogmas, many of which didn't exist or were far outside of the mainstream when this particular movie was made. The reference to the Iraq war is also particularly bizarre given that Desert Storm wouldn't happen for almost 10 years after the movie came out and the next invasion for another 20.
I think @damon is right. I get that the comments are crude, but I'm really not seeing the outrage as particularly principled. I keep asking myself, if a recording of Bill Clinton surfaced making comments to a friend that all he had to do to get an intern to have sex with him was demand it, how would people react? My guess is that most of the people most outraged by Trump would be downplaying it, or saying that comments behind closed doors don't reflect on his ability to do the job.
My politics I don't think are too weird. Maybe I'm a bit more of a civil libertarian than average but I'm quite comfortable with liberal democracy and a republican form of government. I don't even mind some socialism when necessary to keep the boats afloat.
What I'm not comfortable with is the type of authoritarianism and elitism our particular system has started to produce. There's nothing abnormal about that. If there was we wouldn't have one major party overrun by populism (albeit an ugly and nationalistic variety that I reject) and another party whose adherents are increasingly defensive about its capture by elitist interests.
@saul-degraw what I think you're missing is that the resume card is meaningless for people not committed to or frustrated by tribalism and the status quo. For a lot of people (myself included), her resume is her biggest flaw, namely because it's a record of her support for many of the most disastrous tendencies of our political establishment, from foreign policy to criminal justice to big finance. References to it arent a counter argument, they're an attempt to change the subject.
Your point about Sanders can neither be confirmed nor denied. I'm not a Democrat so I didn't vote for him. I can't say that he personally would've been transformational towards the change Id like to see, or what the polls would look like had he been nominated. I can say I respect him for at least trying to force a conversation, which as far as I can tell the party leadership, political establishment (including HRC), and MSM would prefer never occurs.
I largely agree with you that, for whatever reason, the Democrats have become more small c conservative while the Conservative Movement has radicalized. There is certainly an illiberal Left out there but I don't think it has much influence outside of college campuses and parts of the new media. What I find most frustrating about the nomination of HRC is that she is one of the least credible people for pushing back on Trumpism, including the tiny kernels of truth in some of the things he says/sentiments he represents.
I see Trump's recently discovered statements as quite unsurprising given his persona. He's the jackass that I'm sure most of us have rolled our eyes at while he spins bullshit after a beer or 10 at the local watering hole. However, it's hard for me to take the outrage seriously when most of the people who are opposing Trump are about to vote for the return of a notorious hound dog to the White House as first husband, and who argued that this kind of thing wasn't relevant back in the 90s (a point I agreed with). See also notme's comment above.
Maybe I expect too much of the Democrats, but seeing as how they're the only bulwark against the type of nihilism Trump represents I can't help but wish they'd be a little less cautious and a little more principled.
Even if it's true that it's less of a stretch to match a fingerprint than a casing I think your post underscores the problem with a lot of forensic science when used to obtain a conviction for criminal conduct. There's a big difference between what humans and our technology are theoretically capable of doing in ideal circumstances and what tends to happen in big bureaucratic systems with limited resources and all kinds of incentives that are inconsistent with scientific rigor.
After the Natonal Academy of Sciences report from several years ago I think there are pretty serious questions about whether quite a few of the forensic identification techniques currently accepted by courts should continue to be. Maybe this particular tool is a good one and maybe not but I think skepticism is warranted for any seemingly magical means of identifying weapons used in crimes.
I think this is about right. There's no requirement that any Senator explain how they vote, much less that they explain it intelligently. They vote in hypocritical ways all the time. I don't think it'd lose anyone an election
This is what I find generally disturbing. A down vote is fine. It would be a rejection of a candidate for a very important job. The attack on the system on the other hand...
This goes to the point I was trying to make in the prior post. There's a race issue here but it's only a subpart of a bigger problem of militarized, virtually unaccountable police forces.
The basic answer is that it depends on the payor (i.e. out of pocket, commercial insurance, or a government program). The whole industry is supposed to be moving away from fee for service but there is a lot of inertia and regulatory issues that make it slow going.
Don't get me wrong, if American companies will do it then I think that's a good thing. I'd certainly be willing to entertain tax breaks or other policies that would encourage them to do so. All I meant was that I don't think it's workable through our education system without overhauling a whole lot of other systems as well.
I spent a bit of time studying in Germany and while there are a lot of appealing things about their education-to-job system I've concluded that it wouldn't be possible here for numerous cultural and political reasons. We don't have the robust welfare state, lower levels of inequality, and political consensus on certain issues that underlie the success of the system. If we tried to impose it on now existing American society I could actually see it perpetuating all kinds of race and class inequities.
I'm not saying it's awful, and I can almost see some charm in how perfectly it captures the quintessential lameness of NPR (which I do listen to at times). I just struggle to imagine it generating any genuine laughs.
My own journey to enjoyment of black metal not created by Dimmu Borgir grew out of Metallica, Pantera, and Alice in Chains then took a long detour through the mid to late 90s Gothenburg sound and American New Wave (or what some might derisively call metalcore) so I never know what to tell people to start with. I think the fundamental question most of the time is whether the person can handle death vocals yet. That seems to he the critical growing pain for most people.
I am also a big fan of Bathory and of course Emperor.
Also @jaybird you should try to see Amon Amarth live if you havent. They visited DC in the spring and it was an awesome show.
Not being a sufficiently sophisticated poll watcher I'll defer to you on number 1. There is of course always the issue of correlation and causation. Maybe I'm so isolated in blue tribe territory it's hard for me to think about news cycles impacting polls that way but I'm open to the possibility that it does.
No real disagreement on number 2. The traditional media has become too close to establishment power much to the detriment of the democratic principles the country supposedly operates on. My point way back at the top was just that this has been a problem for at least 15-20 years now. It's how we end up with Ellsberg revered and calls to prosecute Edward Snowden.
I think "beholden to authority" is key. It's also why I have so much trouble sympathizing with Clinton and her supporters when they complain about this. She's been as big of a beneficiary of a deferential press as anyone.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.
On “Morning Ed: Society {2016.10.11.T}”
It's what happens when identity politics and similar theories come completely untethered from actual events where those ideas might provide some insight and turn into a religion. One wonders if there would have been a positive review had Oaks said 'this is awful but I guess we had this coming, given how we treated the Indians and all..' or if the airman chuckled as he died from radiation poisoning saying 'well this sucks for me but at least whitey got his come uppance!'
"
Yea I did a bit more poking around his reviews and I agree with your assessment. If I didn't know better I'd almost think it was a really well done satire.
"
I feel like Berlatsky's review completely misses the point of the film. It was to show how easily a small confrotation with the USSR could quickly escalate into a nuclear exchange, and honestly depict what that would look like for the average American. No heroes, just panic, desperation, and slow death from fallout for those who survived the initial blast.
I am too young to have understood The Day After when it was politically relevant. Having seen it since it does have the cheesy made for TV vibe of its era. The characters have Leave It To Beaver values which I'm pretty sure everyone on TV did until roughly the time the Simpsons became popular. That just makes it a product of its time.
Maybe Berlatsky needs to open his mind to the possibility that art can be good (and effective) without genuflecting to modern academia's various dogmas, many of which didn't exist or were far outside of the mainstream when this particular movie was made. The reference to the Iraq war is also particularly bizarre given that Desert Storm wouldn't happen for almost 10 years after the movie came out and the next invasion for another 20.
On “What Trump has in Common with a Subsistence Farmer”
No one in his right mind would ever report that purchase to anyone.
On “Trump and the Conservative Disposition”
Quite right.
"
I think @damon is right. I get that the comments are crude, but I'm really not seeing the outrage as particularly principled. I keep asking myself, if a recording of Bill Clinton surfaced making comments to a friend that all he had to do to get an intern to have sex with him was demand it, how would people react? My guess is that most of the people most outraged by Trump would be downplaying it, or saying that comments behind closed doors don't reflect on his ability to do the job.
"
My politics I don't think are too weird. Maybe I'm a bit more of a civil libertarian than average but I'm quite comfortable with liberal democracy and a republican form of government. I don't even mind some socialism when necessary to keep the boats afloat.
What I'm not comfortable with is the type of authoritarianism and elitism our particular system has started to produce. There's nothing abnormal about that. If there was we wouldn't have one major party overrun by populism (albeit an ugly and nationalistic variety that I reject) and another party whose adherents are increasingly defensive about its capture by elitist interests.
"
That's the biggest irony of all.
"
@saul-degraw what I think you're missing is that the resume card is meaningless for people not committed to or frustrated by tribalism and the status quo. For a lot of people (myself included), her resume is her biggest flaw, namely because it's a record of her support for many of the most disastrous tendencies of our political establishment, from foreign policy to criminal justice to big finance. References to it arent a counter argument, they're an attempt to change the subject.
Your point about Sanders can neither be confirmed nor denied. I'm not a Democrat so I didn't vote for him. I can't say that he personally would've been transformational towards the change Id like to see, or what the polls would look like had he been nominated. I can say I respect him for at least trying to force a conversation, which as far as I can tell the party leadership, political establishment (including HRC), and MSM would prefer never occurs.
"
I largely agree with you that, for whatever reason, the Democrats have become more small c conservative while the Conservative Movement has radicalized. There is certainly an illiberal Left out there but I don't think it has much influence outside of college campuses and parts of the new media. What I find most frustrating about the nomination of HRC is that she is one of the least credible people for pushing back on Trumpism, including the tiny kernels of truth in some of the things he says/sentiments he represents.
I see Trump's recently discovered statements as quite unsurprising given his persona. He's the jackass that I'm sure most of us have rolled our eyes at while he spins bullshit after a beer or 10 at the local watering hole. However, it's hard for me to take the outrage seriously when most of the people who are opposing Trump are about to vote for the return of a notorious hound dog to the White House as first husband, and who argued that this kind of thing wasn't relevant back in the 90s (a point I agreed with). See also notme's comment above.
Maybe I expect too much of the Democrats, but seeing as how they're the only bulwark against the type of nihilism Trump represents I can't help but wish they'd be a little less cautious and a little more principled.
On “Linky Friday #187: Your Money Or Your Life”
Even if it's true that it's less of a stretch to match a fingerprint than a casing I think your post underscores the problem with a lot of forensic science when used to obtain a conviction for criminal conduct. There's a big difference between what humans and our technology are theoretically capable of doing in ideal circumstances and what tends to happen in big bureaucratic systems with limited resources and all kinds of incentives that are inconsistent with scientific rigor.
"
After the Natonal Academy of Sciences report from several years ago I think there are pretty serious questions about whether quite a few of the forensic identification techniques currently accepted by courts should continue to be. Maybe this particular tool is a good one and maybe not but I think skepticism is warranted for any seemingly magical means of identifying weapons used in crimes.
On “Daily Beast: Merrick Garland’s Lonely Road to Purgatory”
I think this is about right. There's no requirement that any Senator explain how they vote, much less that they explain it intelligently. They vote in hypocritical ways all the time. I don't think it'd lose anyone an election
"
This is what I find generally disturbing. A down vote is fine. It would be a rejection of a candidate for a very important job. The attack on the system on the other hand...
On “This Election Is Probably Over”
We got a good start on it last night, and Boston, much as I hate them, gave us a little help.
On “Updates On Police Shoo…No, Wait, Now Alfred Olango Is Dead”
This goes to the point I was trying to make in the prior post. There's a race issue here but it's only a subpart of a bigger problem of militarized, virtually unaccountable police forces.
"
Very well put.
On “Morning Ed: Health {2016.09.28.W}”
The basic answer is that it depends on the payor (i.e. out of pocket, commercial insurance, or a government program). The whole industry is supposed to be moving away from fee for service but there is a lot of inertia and regulatory issues that make it slow going.
On “Morning Ed: World {2016.09.27.T}”
Don't get me wrong, if American companies will do it then I think that's a good thing. I'd certainly be willing to entertain tax breaks or other policies that would encourage them to do so. All I meant was that I don't think it's workable through our education system without overhauling a whole lot of other systems as well.
"
I spent a bit of time studying in Germany and while there are a lot of appealing things about their education-to-job system I've concluded that it wouldn't be possible here for numerous cultural and political reasons. We don't have the robust welfare state, lower levels of inequality, and political consensus on certain issues that underlie the success of the system. If we tried to impose it on now existing American society I could actually see it perpetuating all kinds of race and class inequities.
On “Postmortem: Parsing Policy Platforms and Personalities”
I'm not saying it's awful, and I can almost see some charm in how perfectly it captures the quintessential lameness of NPR (which I do listen to at times). I just struggle to imagine it generating any genuine laughs.
"
I'm surprised to learn Wait Wait Don't Tell Me is anyone's idea of funny.
On “Morning Ed: Europe {2016.09.22.Th}”
@scott-the-mediocre
My own journey to enjoyment of black metal not created by Dimmu Borgir grew out of Metallica, Pantera, and Alice in Chains then took a long detour through the mid to late 90s Gothenburg sound and American New Wave (or what some might derisively call metalcore) so I never know what to tell people to start with. I think the fundamental question most of the time is whether the person can handle death vocals yet. That seems to he the critical growing pain for most people.
I am also a big fan of Bathory and of course Emperor.
Also @jaybird you should try to see Amon Amarth live if you havent. They visited DC in the spring and it was an awesome show.
On “Journalism vs. Trumpism: On Playing the Gentleman’s Game”
Not being a sufficiently sophisticated poll watcher I'll defer to you on number 1. There is of course always the issue of correlation and causation. Maybe I'm so isolated in blue tribe territory it's hard for me to think about news cycles impacting polls that way but I'm open to the possibility that it does.
No real disagreement on number 2. The traditional media has become too close to establishment power much to the detriment of the democratic principles the country supposedly operates on. My point way back at the top was just that this has been a problem for at least 15-20 years now. It's how we end up with Ellsberg revered and calls to prosecute Edward Snowden.
"
I think "beholden to authority" is key. It's also why I have so much trouble sympathizing with Clinton and her supporters when they complain about this. She's been as big of a beneficiary of a deferential press as anyone.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.