Gods of the Modern World and the Cartoon History Of The Universe

José Clemente Orozco painted these crazy frescos at Dartmouth around 1933.  My pal Larry Gonick sends a vivid closeup:

photo: Larry Gonick

Gotta check these out.  If you haven’t read Larry Gonick’s Cartoon History Of The Universe:

Strongest recommend!  Epic achievements in bringing history to life by both artists.

 


Truth forever on the scaffold, wrong forever on the throne

The famous King moments are so burned into our collective dream history that they can lose their freshness.  .

Somewhere recently I came across a clip of the line at 0:40 above, truth forever on the scaffold, wrong forever on the throne.

A quote from

James Russell Lowell. The Present Crisis, which he wrote in 1844, when he was deep in abolitionism.

King returned to this line often.

Good reminder that truth being on the scaffold and wrong being on the throne is not a new problem.


What was up with Marshall McLuhan?

Culture Is Our Business (1970)

  • World War III is a guerrilla information war with no division between military and civilian participation. (p.66)
  • The newspaper is a corporate symbolist poem, environmental and invisible, as poem.
  • Since Sputnik there is no Nature. Nature is an item contained in a man-made environment of satellites and information.

  • The only cool PR is provided by one’s enemies. They toil incessantly and for free.

(this video is part of some kind of presentation for a class?)

Take Today : The Executive as Dropout (1972)

  • Only puny secrets need protection. Big secrets are protected by public incredulity. You can actually dissipate a situation by giving it maximal coverage. As to alarming people, that’s done by rumours, not by coverage. (p. 92)

The fact that Marshall McLuhan is perhaps best known for a brief appearance in a movie would not surprise him at all, I don’t think.  What was this guy going on about?  I’ve never read an entire one of his books, but why I wouldn’t bother to read a Marshall McLuhan book is exactly the kind of thing he was getting at.

One of the things that happens at the speed of light is that people lose their goals in life. So what takes the place of goals and objectives? Well, role-playing is coming in very fast.

  • Interview between Californian Governor Jerry Brown and Marshall McLuhan, 1977

The Gutenberg Galaxy (1962)

  • The medieval student had to be paleographer, editor, and publisher of the authors he read. (p. 109)
    • Scribal culture and Gothic architecture were both concerned with light through, not light on. (p. 120)
  • Electric technology is directly related to our central nervous systems, so it is ridiculous to talk of “what the public wants” played over its own nerves. (p. 68)

From Cliché to Archetype (1970)

  • Since Sputnik and the satellites, the planet is enclosed in a manmade environment that ends “Nature” and turns the globe into a repertory theater to be programmed. Shakespeare at the Globe mentioning “All the world’s a stage, and all the men and women merely players” (As You Like It, Act II, Scene 7) has been justified by recent events in ways that would have struck him as entirely paradoxical. The results of living inside a proscenium arch of satellites is that the young now accept the public spaces of the earth as role-playing areas. Sensing this, they adopt costumes and roles and are ready to “do their thing” everywhere.” (p.9-10)

The longest thing I’ve read of McLuhan is this interview in a 1969 Playboy magazine:

Interviewer: If personal freedom will still exist—although restricted by certain consensual taboos— in this new tribal world, what about the political system most closely associated with individual freedom: democracy? Will it, too, survive the transition to your global village?

McLuhan: No, it will not. The day of political democracy as we know it today is finished. Let me stress again that individual freedom itself will not be submerged in the new tribal society, but it will certainly assume different and more complex dimensions. The ballot box, for example, is the product of literate Western culture—a hot box in a cool world—and thus obsolescent. The tribal will is consensually expressed through the simultaneous interplay of all members of a community that is deeply interrelated and involved, and would thus consider the casting of a “private” ballot in a shrouded polling booth a ludicrous anachronism. The TV networks’ computers, by “projecting” a victor in a Presidential race while the polls are still open, have already rendered the traditional electoral process obsolescent. In our software world of instant electric communications movement, politics is shifting from the old patterns of political representation by electoral delegation to a new form of spontaneous and instantaneous communal involvement in all areas of decision making. In a tribal all-at-once culture, the idea of the “public” as a differentiated agglomerate of fragmented individuals, all dissimilar but all capable of acting in basically the same way, like interchangeable mechanical cogs in a production line, is supplanted by a mass society in which personal diversity is encouraged while at the same time everybody reacts and interacts simultaneously to every stimulus. The election as we know it today will be meaningless in such a society.

Interviewer: How will the popular will be registered in the new tribal society if elections are pass?

McLuhan: The electric media open up totally new means of registering popular opinion. The old concept of the plebiscite, for example, may take on new relevance; TV could conduct daily plebiscites by presenting facts to 200,000,000 people and providing a computerized feedback of the popular will. But voting, in the traditional sense, is through as we leave the age of political parties, political issues and political goals, and enter an age where the collective tribal image and the iconic image of the tribal chieftain is the overriding political reality. But that’s only one of countless new realities we’ll be confronted with in the tribal village. We must understand that a totally new society is coming into being, one that rejects all our old values, conditioned responses, attitudes and institutions. If you have difficulty envisioning something as trivial as the imminent end of elections, you’ll be totally unprepared to cope with the prospect of the forthcoming demise of spoken language and its replacement by a global consciousness.

More:

Interviewer: How is television reshaping our political institutions?

McLuhan: TV is revolutionizing every political system in the Western world. For one thing, it’s creating a totally new type of national leader, a man who is much more of a tribal chieftain than a politician. Castro is a good example of the new tribal chieftain who rules his country by a mass-participational TV dialog and feedback; he governs his country on camera, by giving the 11 Cuban people the experience of being directly and intimately involved in the process of collective decision making. Castro’s adroit blend of political education, propaganda and avuncular guidance is the pattern for tribal chieftains in other countries. The new political showman has to literally as well as figuratively put on his audience as he would a suit of clothes and become a corporate tribal image—like Mussolini, Hitler and F.D.R. in the days of radio, and Jack Kennedy in the television era. All these men were tribal emperors on a scale theretofore unknown in the world, because they all mastered their media. . . . The overhauling of our traditional political system is only one manifestation of the retribalizing process wrought by the electric media, which is turning the planet into a global village.

found that here, at a UC Davis class website.

McLuhan was so good at taxonomies — consider what Tom Wolfe recounts him telling IBM, at 47:00-48:00 below:

 

This is the coolest McLuhan quote, in my opinion:

I’ve always been careful never to predict anything that had not already happened.

  • Interview: Tom Wolfe, TVOntario, August 1970

Case Study in Business Journalism

As part of my Year of Business I’ve been reading some business articles.  Often I find that the headlines are incredibly misleading, often close to opposite of accurate.  Take this example:

Read the article, and the source is a Vanguard study which you can read here.  Here’s page one with an abstract:

A more accurate headline would be “A Small Minority of Millennials Are Sitting Out The Bull Market, While Most Of Them Are Doing Exactly What Everybody Else Does” which is kind of interesting.  The truth is well put in a footnote to the article:

Wouldn’t another, perhaps more accurate headline be: “Despite Lessons Of Their Youth, Millennials Follow Traditional Investing Path”?

But consider: we’re only talking about a sample of 4 million Vanguard investors.  So: a self-selected sample of people with 1) money to invest and 2) choosing a conservative investment company!  I would guess the “typical millennial household” has no equity at all?

Buried in the Vanguard study is a story that’s almost more interesting, namely that older generations are taking more investment risk than most advisors would think is wise:

Why this greater-than-expected taste for equity market risk among older investors? It’s worth noting that many current retirees hold traditional pensions, allowing, all other things equal, for more equity risk-taking. Other possible drivers of risk appetite among older investors include concerns over health care costs, low bond yields, and a desire to fund bequests for heirs. And beyond these financial factors are the shared generational experience of investing—both cohorts enjoyed the positive results of the great equity bull market from 1982–2000.

Even the Vanguard study itself contains strange, generational based assumptions:

Who is wiser, the 1/5 of millennials who witnessed 2008 and make the choice to have a “conservative” investment strategy relative to conventional wisdom, or the Baby Boomers who are still operating on 1980s assumptions?

My point here is not to criticize, it’s just to note ongoing observations:

  • headlines can be very misleading
  • when you go to the source of a story, it always gets deeper and more interesting
  • small inaccuracies of language, shorthands, and misleads can compound until we have a distorted picture of reality.  Was this not itself one of the causes of 2008 crisis?

The end of “The End of History” by Francis Fukuyama

The end of history will be a very sad time. The struggle for recognition, the willingness to risk one’s life for a purely abstract goal, the worldwide ideological struggle that called forth daring, courage, imagination, and idealism, will be replaced by economic calculation, the endless solving of technical problems, environmental concerns, and the satisfaction of sophisticated consumer demands. In the post-historical period there will be neither art nor philosophy, just the perpetual caretaking of the museum of human history. I can feel in myself, and see in others around me, a powerful nostalgia for the time when history existed. Such nostalgia, in fact, will continue to fuel competition and conflict even in the post-historical world for some time to come. Even though I recognize its inevitability, I have the most ambivalent feelings for the civilization that has been created in Europe since 1945, with its north Atlantic and Asian offshoots. Perhaps this very prospect of centuries of boredom at the end of history will serve to get history started once again.

That’s the last paragraph of the famous essay from 1989, which I found here.  (I haven’t read the book, I’m busy!)


What Will Trigger The Next Crisis?

What Will Trigger The Next Crisis? is a subtext of many a Wall Street Journal article, but this week that was the headline on what I found to be an unusually succinct and comprehensible roundup of possible catalysts.

Interest Rates Jump

Bad-Loan Boom

China Cracks

Supply-Chain Disruptions

were four of the possibilities, but the one that caught me was

Italy Dumps The Euro

But Italy may be wavering. Italian bond yields spiked in May after two parties with anti-euro leanings tried to form a new government. The crisis could escalate again once politicians return from holidays. Some 59% of Italians want to keep the common currency, official surveys show—the slimmest majority in the eurozone.

I like the idea that a bunch of Italian politicians coming back from vacation is a global financial crisis waiting to happen.

La grande bellezza

In this same issue of the WSJ:


The Moviegoer

Took this one off my shelf the other day.  Think I was supposed to read it in college but never finished it.  The plot didn’t propel me along, but there’s some magic to it for sure.  A relaxed New Orleans kind of existentialism.  

What’s the narrator looking for?  Even he doesn’t know. 

He sees a young man reading on the bus, and types him:

Good old Walker Percy:

At one point the narrator sees William Holden on the street:

Ah, William Holden. Already we need you again. Already the fabric is wearing thin without you.


Celebs getting out the vote

struck by the intro to this one.  Celebs have been trying to get young people to vote for a long time.

 


worry they’re not anxious enough

from yesterday’s Washington Post


Guess how much Nestlé pays for the water in Arrowhead Water

Nestlé gets the water for Arrowhead in the San Bernadino National Forest, owned by you and me, the American people.

In 2016, Nestlé took 32 million gallons of water from the national forest, in an area not known for its abundance of fresh water.

How much did they pay for this?  I found the answer in a recent issue of High Country News:

$2,050?!  I feel like I’m getting ripped off!

More in the Desert Sun.

Swung by Lake Arrowhead this weekend:


the workings of capitalism

found that blunt history, which sounds like it would fit in a socio-anarchist pamphlet, in


message

sent by Rhode Island desk


Pleasantries

Woke up and felt putting some pleasantness on the Internet could be a service.  Pic I took of Caleb and Hana’s alpacas.

Here is a Scottish fold from when I was researching how many famous Internet cats (Maru, Shrampton, Waffles, Taylor Swift’s cats) all have the same common ancestor in Scotland, 1961.

Here’s a comparison of the size of Netherlands to the size of LA, probably from OverlapMap or MapFrappe.  I’m not sure if the Netherlands is bigger or smaller than I expected.


Weak, weak, weak

The Trump era will end when a Democrat can get in Trump’s face and confidently say this.  American politics is not structured for this kinda face to face thing so maybe it won’t be until 2020.

Jump to 3:42 in this director’s cut to see the almost sexual excitement that explodes when Blair drops the word “weak”:

Sherrod Brown is the Dem who physically resembles Blair here the most, imo.

Once a confident Democrat is calling Trump weak to his face, the fight will enter the pattern laid out by Randall Collins:

How does violence sometimes succeed in doing damage? The key is asymmetrical  confrontation tension. One side will win if they can get their victim in the zone of high arousal and high incompetence, while keeping their own arousal down to a zone of greater bodily control.

Trump will enter a state of high arousal and high incompetence.  Collins continues:

Violence is not so much physical as emotional struggle; whoever achieves emotional domination, can then impose physical domination. That is why most real fights look very nasty; one sides beats up on an opponent at the time they are incapable of resisting.

Unfortch a US president in a state of high arousal and high incompetence has a non-zero chance of ending human life on Earth, so that also must be weighed.


When tyrants tremble sick with fear and hear their death knells ringing

we used to listen to this record when I was a kid.

when friends by shame are undefiled

also a good line.

The first was the 2011 NATO intervention in Libya, which led, ultimately, to the ousting and gruesome lynching of the Libyan dictator, Muammar Qaddafi. Afterward, many people who interacted with Putin noticed how deeply Qaddafi’s death troubled him. He is said to have watched the video of the killing over and over. “The way Qaddafi died made a profound impact on him,” says Jake Sullivan, a former senior State Department official who met repeatedly with senior Russian officials around that time. Another former senior Obama-administration official describes Putin as “obsessed” with Qaddafi’s death

reported Julia Ioffe for the Atlantic in February 2018.


The question, silently: do you really know where you are at this point in time and space and in reality and in existence?

(not great image quality there but the audio! from one of my favs:

(avail on FilmStruck streaming, possibly Netflix as well)


Summits with Russia

Tehran, 1943.  FDR and Stalin joke (?) around with Churchill about the idea of executing German officers:

  When they had disposed of Germany, Stalin threw off care; he was, the Ambassador said, in superb form, pulling the P.M.’s [Winston Churchill’s] leg all the evening.  I asked the Ambassador:

“Was Stalin’s ragging a cat-like instinct to play with a mouse, or was he just in great spirits now that he had gained his end?”

He did not answer.  The P. M. had not, he said, tumbled to Stalin’s game.  The Ambassador was full of Stalin’s talk.

Stalin: “Fifty thousand Germans must be killed.  Their General Staff must go.”

P.M. (rising and pacing the room): “I will not be a party to any butchery in cold blood.  What happens in hot blood is another matter.”

Stalin: “Fifty thousand must be shot.”

The P.M. got very red in the face.

P.M.: “I would rather be taken out now and shot then disgrace my country.”

The President, said the Ambassador, then joined in the fun.

Roosevelt: “I have a compromise to propose.  Not fifty thousand, but only forty-nine thousand should be shot.”

The Prime Minister got up and left the room.  Stalin followed him, telling him he was only joking.  They came back together.  Stalin had a broad grin on his face.

The Ambassador is Sir Archibald Clark Kerr,  quoted in:


San Cristóbal

took this one myself.

Visited the town of San Cristóbal while writing this book:

Now I read in the New York Times piece by Oscar Lopez and Andrew Jacobs that the residents don’t have enough water, and so instead are drinking Coke.

Why don’t they have enough water?

Because of the Coke factory.

Buffeted by the dual crises of the diabetes epidemic and the chronic water shortage, residents of San Cristóbal have identified what they believe is the singular culprit: the hulking Coca-Cola factory on the edge of town.

The plant has permits to extract more than 300,000 gallons of water a day as part of a decades-old deal with the federal government that critics say is overly favorable to the plant’s owners.

Bill Clinton in his post presidency used to speak of working with Coca-Cola, which has one of the world’s most effective distribution networks, to bring health care and medicine to remote places in Africa.  Thought that was kind of a cool idea, neoliberalism at its best, you know?  There was a positive story to tell there, but you gotta wonder who is really steering in the relationship of Coke and politicians.

If you want to read about San Cristóbal and San Juan Chamula and the nearby towns of Chiapas, get my book.  A special place, grateful I got to go there.


BDE?


Nanette and Domino’s Pizza and Taxonomies

Really interested in this Schumpeter column in a recent issue of The Economist:

NOT many businesspeople study post-war French philosophy, but they could certainly learn from it. Michel Foucault, who died in 1984, argued that how you structure information is a source of power. A few of America’s most celebrated bosses, including Jeff Bezos and Warren Buffett, understand this implicitly, adroitly manipulating how outsiders see their firms. It is one of the most important but least understood skills in business.

Foucault was obsessed with taxonomies, or how humans split the world into arbitrary mental categories in order “to tame the wild profusion of existing things”. When we flip these around, “we apprehend in one great leap…the exotic charm of another system of thought”. Imagine, for example, a supermarket organised by products’ vintage. Lettuces, haddock, custard and the New York Times would be grouped in an aisle called “items produced yesterday”. Scotch, string, cans of dog food and the discounted Celine Dion DVDs would be in the “made in 2008” aisle.

I’m always into it when CEOs have a bold claim on what kind of company they are, redefining their own classification.  Here are some examples:

 

Or in Ugly Delicious when Dave Chang says Domino’s is a technology company:

 

Was thinking about how important taxonomy is.  Take, for instance, Nanette:

How much of the staggered, overpowered reaction to this special comes from approaching it in the taxonomy “standup comedy” / “Netflix comedy special” and then having that classification broken/subverted?

Would it have a different effect if you experienced it in the category “Edinburgh Fringe Festival-style personal show,” an overlapping but different taxonomy?

What about how the Emmys has the categories “comedy” and “drama,” when it seems to me the cool nominees in both categories tend to blur and push the limits of those definitions?

Another example of taxonomic power from Charles C. Mann’s Reddit AMA:

I am so grateful for the W&P book. Thank you for exploring these issues. I work in Oil and Gas and I’m very concerned about that unfortunate byproduct climate change. I’m also tired of being the bad guy at dinner parties. Is responsible oil and gas development a contradiction in terms? I’m wondering if you could sketch a possible social imaginary in which people like me have a beneficial role in contributing to our needed energy switch, while at the same time, you know, maybe keeping my job for a few years???

AMA Author

16 points·10 days ago·edited 9 days ago

My son is in the energy business, too. He worries about this.

I always tell him, there is no reason to be the “bad guy” at parties. First, fossil fuels have contributed immensely to human well-being—there’s just no question about that. And, until we learned about climate change, there was little reason to doubt they had, on balance, a good ecological role. I live in a cold place (Massachusetts) that requires heating for people to survive. It would be a wasteland if people were still heating with wood. Wood heat denuded the entire NE, causing massive erosion and soil loss. Fossil fuels had in this case profound positive effects.

Now… climate change is a different matter.

Broadly speaking, it seems to me that there are two kind of fossil fuel companies, those which have decided they are energy companies, and those which have decided they are oil and gas companies. The former are adapting to the new reality, heavily investing in alternative energy and working to innovate; the latter are fighting progress. (I hope you are lucky enough to work for one of the former!) The former will continue to be indispensable to modern society. Note that almost all of the essential development of solar panels–what transformed them from laboratory curiosities at Bell Labs to a workable product–was done by oil and gas companies, which needed to power offshore oil platforms. Until China entered the market, Big Oil made the overwhelming majority of solar panels. Some companies will continue in that tradition and eventually build and maybe operate huge renewable facilities, especially with technologies like offshore wind.

What about the latter type of company? They will become, eventually and grudgingly, suppliers of raw materials for other industries–oil, gas, coal tar, etc., are essential modern raw materials. That’s a smaller role, but not one to be ashamed of. Still, I’d rather be working inside one of the first type, working to push the transition to renewables, which is what my son is doing.

Readers, what do you think about taxonomies?