Tonight, We Are All Pyongyang.

Compare and Contrast?

Hmm, the closest analogy I can come up with is maybe:

CBS correspondent in DC : Student Protester in Iran :: Nanterre in 68 : Prague Spring?

I know it's not quite apt, so if anyone can come up with something better, please let me know.


***

Actually, it occurred to me - as frivolous and immature as I do see a lot of 68ers as being, there *were* actual causes for grievance or protest in Mai 68. When compared to their Czech counterparts, though, the French students come across as incredibly immature.

So, need to come up with a better analogue. Maybe

CBS correspondent in DC : Student Protester in Iran :: Nero Fiddling : Rome Burning would be better.

Catharsis

and more catharsis.

Have been following both for some time, might as well put their links on my little sidebar of fame (for what it's worth).

Have been going on about the //s between the French unvetted, underqualified, hyper mediatized president and ours for some time. Things continue here like they are over there (will get into that later), we're going to start seeing stuff like this, I'm afraid.

And over at the Presidential Palace in Tehran, Chavez's BFF is all like,

"You...said...Bush."




¡Mira! ¡En Español! Really, I think I'm onto something here.

Important stuff to keep in mind.

Got into a conversation with a friend yesterday who said that we westerners were in the worst of times because of "rabid, radical feminism." It kind of blew my mind to think that she could have that mindset (not that I'm a rabid feminist or anything. Really.) when even nowadays (though not so much in the in the west after maybe fifty years ago) a woman could be put to death as a witch, gang raped, forced into prostitution, etc if she was a non-breeding woman without a husband.

I don't like a lot of what's going on in the world we're currently in, and I certainly don't like a lot of the western male's misogynistic backlash against the feminist pendulum overcompensating, but I also understand who the good guys are or, ultimately, which side my bread's buttered on.

Keeping Things in Perspective.

It's what's keeping me on a fairly even keel during this period of flashy rhetoric from Congress and gloom and dooming from the media.*

As I mentioned earlier, have been slogging my way through the Progressive Era when things were much worse for the wage workers than today** and was noting that the leadup what's happening nowadays is strikingly similar to before the depressions of 1894 and 1929. Even then, especially with the birth of the Progressive and Socialist parties, there were calls to nationalize industries. Teddy Roosevelt, Taft to a lesser extent and even Wilson were more in favor of regulation, however. Of course, as we've seen lately, too much regulation as well as bad regulation can cause problems, too.

Anyway, the calls for revolution we hear from the left, the far right, whoever else, aren't anything new, nor are they really likely to lead to any cataclysmic changes (as some against their better judgements would hope)***. Even the progressives back in the time of Square Deal Teddy knew this.

Finley Peter Dunne, a humorist during that era best known for his Mr. Dooley**** anecdotes, very nicely summed up the progression of American government and reform by likening it to housecleaning:

"The noise you hear is not the first gun of a revolution. It's only the people of the United States beating a carpet."


Would that more people would keep this in mind nowadays. It'd save us from a lot of grief later on.

---


* Their perspective's been a gloomy one for a while, as, well, they're all going out of business. Wonder when the Times, for example, is going to ask for a bailout.

** Again, perspective: between 1895-1896 something like 1000 banks failed and there was NO deposit insurance back then, either. There was no worker's compensation, no unemployment, very few pay raises, next to no job security, either. Not like we have nowadays, anyway. Also, the government used to send the National Guard out to shoot people who struck.

*** At least, I hope, in this Brave New technological world, that there won't be any major cataclysms. After all, a Czogolsz today has access to things far more lethal than a pistol.

**** Amazon's got a deal on two of Dunne's Mr. Dooley books, I see. Even one would be nice, though. *hint.*

Didn't have the greatest start to the day, as at about 4:00 this morning, got a recorded phone call from Somerville telling me that there was a multiple-alarm fire in the neighborhood and that I needed to call them to confirm receipt (something like that). Called the number cited and just barely made out from the guy who answered that the fire was on Walnut Street and that the call was a mistake. He then asked me if I lived with Paul (huh?).

Had a really difficult time falling back to sleep I was so creeped out. Turns out, Pavel heard the call from downstairs and was kind of weirded out as well.

Since we were still up at around six, decided to get ready and go to the polling station first thing in order to avoid the lines. (snort) As it turned out, when we got there at 6:55 am, there was already a long line twisting through the parking lot of the Dante Club and starting its way up Craigie Street.

I'd say that it took probably about an hour to get through the line. Voting took maybe two minutes. (Pays to do your research beforehand). Though we both voted similarly on the candidate portion, on the ballot questions, we sort of cancelled each other out:

1: He voted yes, I voted no. I understand his point of view, as, having worked for a horrendously wasteful government-funded organization for years, I'd love to see them starved of funds. However, this isn't how stuff works out. Most likely what would happen is that, as a punitive measure, schools, fire, police, etc - really necessary, public face stuff would be cut out.

2: He voted yes, I voted no. His maintenance is that, if marijuana is decriminalized, that would mean that college students would stay home stoned rather than vote, and we need to keep dumb kids out of the polls (he also thinks we should raise the voting age to 40 and only allow property owners the vote, as well.) My thoughts on the subject are that it's a slippery slope (How's that decriminalization of cocaine and statutory rape working out, London?).

3: He voted no, I voted yes. It's not that I hate dogs, far from it. It's the wording of the question that bothered me. Seemed more like MA trying to regulate betting and couching it in animal rights more than anything else.

Questions 4 and 5 (only valid in our part of Somerville): We both voted no, as, as I'd mentioned before, they are supported by a very noxious pressure group that will not take no for an answer.

***

Afterwards, went over to Starbucks to get coffee, but couldn't stand another line. Wasn't worth it, even for free good stuff.

GOP Primary:

Good on the Singer for not having sung in a sick vibrato.

Couldn't get to sleep last night, so after having read about all I could on Reconstruction, I finished this* off.

This morning, I fired up the old innernet and found that McCain's chosen a running mate who could very well be a descendent of the women in that book. This is so exciting. I was going to vote for him anyway not because I'm a huge fan of his but because of my dislike of the opposition**. Now I have a good reason to be pleased about my choice.

***

* It was an okay book, not the best I've read, but okay. Some factual errors. A bit too politically correct for my taste. Did make me remember how much I'm jonesing for Maine, though. Haven't been up yet. Will have to remedy that.

** Guess that makes me a racist. Sorry.

Truth and Soul.



Careful - not too safe for work.

Two things lacking in the political races this year. (How awful that I've had this song running through my head for like a week now? Beats the heck out of that new Eurythmics song, anyway.)

Nothing to Worry About.



Areva employee in hazmat suit: Do we look like we're worried about radioactivity?

Areva's having a bit of a PR nightmare in France lately due to a couple of accidents in the last week: Tricastin and Romans-sur-Isère. Both were leaks that polluted local rivers, and both were considered to have negligable impact on the environment (though what "negligible" actually means is open for discussion).

Of course, two leaks in a week at two plants operated by the same company that runs something like 40 centrals in France, is the largest nuclear supplier in the US and that is expanding operations to the Middle East and China is causing a bit of soul-searching and even questioning of the party line regarding the 'clean, green, renewable' energy source in the Hexagon. As well it should.

I hear a lot of American pundits-types talk about how we should go nuclear using France as the model of how things should be done. Now, I'm not anti this by any stretch. However, I do think that such decisions do require a fair bit of looking before leaping. What would be the cost/benefit comparisons between starting from scratch with nuclear and improving coal plants? What advantages does nuclear have over wind, for example (don't laugh; wind power is harnessed as well in France and is quite competetive with other sources), what are the operational costs (including down time) for a the typical Coal/Nuclear/etc delivery method?

It would also be good to check out data provided by sources other than the French monopoly, too.