New School Politics

If you're a first time visitor, you may want to subscribe to our RSS feed, which will keep you up to date with all the latest New School Politics posts. Thanks for visiting!

The country’s largest voting bloc, the Christian Right, seems to be at a crossroads.  Generations have preached the importance of family values, such as the abolition of abortion.  They also have succeeded in forcing politicians to block the passage of gay marriage amendments.  While these are among the most minor of their activities, they are the most public.  As such, the country has a right to hold their activities in high regard.

Recently, it seems as if some of their leaders have had trouble adhering to the very same standards they preach about.  The Reverend Ted Haggard, once the President of the National Association of Evangelicals, was found soliciting homosexual favors from a male prostitute.  Several weeks later, Haggard announced he was “reformed” and ready to lead again, having attended a re-education camp of sorts to rid him of his homosexuality, exactly what he preached against.  The movie Jesus Camp does an amazing job detailing his activities, and the Evangelical/Christian Right movement. 

Today, however, they’re back in the spotlight as the President of the Christian Action League was found soliciting sex from a prostitute in his hometown.  While not nearly as public as Ted Haggard’s confession and public conviction, this still should be taken seriously.  If Evangelicals can’t even hit their own moral targets, how can they expect others to?  The story’s Newsvine thread contains some rather entertaining comments about Privette’s actions.  The fact that he paid the prostitute with a check won’t help his case both in the eyes of the law, and in the eyes of the public. 

Once again, however, this isn’t an isolated incident.  If incidents like these keep popping up, will the Christian Right lose trust in their leaders?  These breaches in moral policy represent a growing problem for the Religious Right, and it’s something they’re going to have to examine further down the road as the movement becomes more and more important to American politics. 

Popularity: 31% [?]

In the past, the Live ___ concerts have been hugely successful. Both, Live Aid and Live 8, have had a clear purpose in mind: raise money to either pay off debt or help to feed starving children. Al Gore, however, utilized his well-publicized Live Earth to “kick start a global movement” to react to global warming. Not everyone agrees with global warming, and there are certainly ways to persuade individuals to look at scientific backup in its favor.

Is a concert, however, the best way? After briefly attending the Washington, DC gathering at the National Museum of the American Indian and watching bits and pieces of the concert on TV, I can conclusively say that it’s most definitely not. Although it was the most watched webcast ever, it was not very well attended at the various locations throughout the world. Furthermore, would an anti-global warming activist attend or watch the concert? Short snippets between musical acts were dedicated to global warming lessons, most of which were ridiculously stupid.

The LA Times and several other sites point out some interesting facts about the concert, showcasing the hypocrisy of many of its participants. LA Times columnist Jonah Goldberg sums up the concert perfectly:

considering the energy required to put on the show, the nine Live Earth concerts doubtlessly raised more CO2 than awareness. NBC’s three-hour televised version got trounced by “Cops” and “America’s Funniest Home Videos.” Moreover, surely most of the people who attended or tuned in already knew about global warming before they saw the video tutorial about Ed Begley Jr.’s eco-friendly home and sanctimony-powered go-cart.

While I appreciate Gore’s efforts in attempting to help to solve the global warming problem, it’s difficult not to view much of this global warming “awareness” as hypocrisy as well.  I’m not a staunch global-warming observer, but I don’t refuse to acknowledge that it exists either.  Gore’s excellent film “An Inconvenient Truth” provides some excellent facts and justification for his claims.  Regardless of global warming’s existence, Gore should have realized the impropriety his concert practiced.  Why hold a concert railing against a problem you’re claiming to solve?

Popularity: 61% [?]

Liberals defend many causes. They want us to back the people of various countries by giving them aid. They also advocate wealth distribution and other socialist programs. Thirdly, they want to protect the environment.

Unfortunately, here is our problem. These all conflict with each other.

Our world population stands at about 6.7 billion people and counting. The carrying capacity (for those of you without a high school education, that means the sustainable population size of a group in an area) of Earth for humans ranges between 500 million and 3 billion. That means that about 3.7 billion people extra are alive.

To make up for this, we decide to give away our “abundance” of resources to other nations. Unfortunately, these nations percieve us Western, developed nations to be a utopia of overabundance. Thus, they consume aid faster than we can provide it in such useless things as armies, genocide, weapons, beauracracy, and unnecessary goverment programs.

Well, guess what left-wingers. We’re consuming our environment’s resources faster than it can regenerate. Thus, the environment will keep shrinking and producing less, while we consume more. At the same time, if we try to share everything, we’ll just use it up faster. Some people will consume their share immediately, while others will decide to conserve their resources. Then the have-nots will demand a share from the haves, and we will keep repeating this until eventually nobody has any resources and we leave a barren, lifeless planet behind us.

There are three ways to solve this problem.

The first way, and the one I think is most effective, useful, and least infringing on my rights, is to stop sending aid to other countries, and to stop trying to share the wealth and divide everything up. Let natural selection take its course, I say, and prevent the unproductive and the unfit from reproducing. Otherwise, we favor the people whose genes are not the innovative, the intelligent, the athletic, but rather those whom reproduce the quickest. In our society, that would be people whom I personally would not trust running our government. Not only will we be able to filter out a whole bunch of people that leech off of the productive ones, but we would also be able to help conserve our resources and let them regenerate. Think about it, the people whom keep bringing back smallpox, polio, and drug resistant tuberculosis are infringing on my right to be healthy. The reason they have these is because they were too stupid to not follow the instructions of their doctors: thus, they shouldn’t be able to remain able to spread disease to me. We should let them die off quicker, so we don’t get infected.
As for those people in other countries, they can fight amongst themselves, reducing populations for us without the expenditure of my hard-earned tax-paid resources. It will also help to filter out a new generation of intelligent, hard-working peoples, instead of a generation of druggies, gangsters, warmongers, prostitutes, religious hypocrites, idiots, and disease-spreaders.

A second way to reduce populations, of course, is mass genocide. I’m not even going to discuss this one because it is too immoral for even my tastes. It would do wonders for the environment, though-all that biomass will help propogate species.

As a side note, I, unlike other libertarian-capitalist-objectivist-neocon peoples on this blog, support the environment, because without it, I wouldn’t be able to have foods, cures to diseases, oxygen, and other necessities of life. Plus, we need it to help suppress unwanted species from growing, like poison ivy, weeds, and Homo Sapiens.

The third way to control the population is to establish space colonies. Unfortunately, all the resources that may go to that are instead going to random countries to build more weapons to kill our people. Seriously, if people want money, they’re going to have to earn it by working, not by pulling strings.

And as a side note, for those whom complain at how rich children control all of the wealth anyways, one will figure that they will squander all of their money away anyways, and help to remove their stain from our gene pool.

And that’s my Darwinistic look of our world today.

Editor’s Note: Profanity was removed from this post and it was edited for further grammatical consistency at 10:45PM on 7/4/2007.  

Popularity: 37% [?]

Habeas Corpus is a right that all Americans should hold dear. As with many other promises contained in the Constitution, the Writ of Habeas Corpus is one that protects the American people from their government. The only time it had previously been suspended was during the Civil War by Abraham Lincoln, and he had done so legally “in a time of war.” President Bush, however, has attempted to circumvent the rules of the Constitution by giving some terrorism suspects special treatment with an “enemy combatant” moniker. The name enables the government to treat the victim as a POW, even if s/he is an American citizen.

The Military Commissions Act of 2006 aimed to “facilitate bringing to justice terrorists and other unlawful enemy combatants through full and fair trials by military commissions, and for other purposes.” Instead, however, it faciliates the deliberate destruction of several rights integral to the American tradition. Pushed through by a Republican Congress, the act has raised eyebrows at watchdog organizations like Amnesty International.

Dozens of cases like that of Jose Padilla have clogged the American military justice system as dozens of prisoners remain in Guantanamo Bay awaiting charges, not a trial. The Democrats, desperate for an election win in 2006, claimed they would repeal the bill. Still, months into a new Democratic-led majority, we’ve seen no policy change and no new direction. It seems as if the Democrats are content with revoking Habeas Corpus as well. The current Administration doesn’t understand the unconstitutionality of the bill, and nor does Congress.

Fortunately for America, the judicial system does. This week, a federal court ruled in favor of an enemy combatant, noting that the federal government could not imprison a US resident on suspicion alone. The beauty of America lies in its system of checks and balances, and, finally, the government has done its job. After Congress and the White House failed to protect individual freedoms, the courts have stepped up to the plate, finally doing what should have been done long ago.

Popularity: 32% [?]

“Allahu Akhbar” comes the cry almost simultaneously from dozens of buildings across the Gaza Strip. This isn’t, however, just any other call to prayer in the Palestinian territories. Instead, militants from Hamas are celebrating the “liberation” of Palestine. Hamas declared an almost immediate victory as their forces steamrolled over the Fatah, their more moderate political opponents. Claims Hamas, today is the”second liberation of the Gaza Strip, this time from the herds of collaborators.” Hamas, somewhat deluded, believes they vanquished Israeli forces in 2005 and will proceed to crush their Fatah opponents in 2007.

For Hamas, 2007 is the year of government. In early 2006, Hamas won a majority in some of the West Bank and Gaza’s first democratic elections (although the results and methods of polling were contested). The government was controlled partially by Mahmoud Abbas, the chairman of the PLO Executive Committee, and the leader of Fatah. In recent years, Abbas’ voice has spoken for moderate Palestians, those who seek to live with peace and tranquility instead of war and destruction. It seems as if, at last, the voice of moderation has been drowned out. This week’s onslaught against Fatah makes the organization seem almost saintly, at least in comparison to Hamas.

Hamas has finally removed the last bastion against an Islamic government, leading the way to a country based strictly on Sharia law. International news coverage, however, barely begins to scratch the surface. Hamas’ attacks aren’t just an attack on Fatah. Instead, they’re the final strokes in an operation that began years ago. With this victory, Hamas has the opportunity to turn the Palestinian territories into a state run with an iron fist, quieting dissent and punishing protesters.What the majority of individuals fail to notice is that Palestine has been this way for years. The territory, once a well-governed section of the prosperous nation of Israel, has seen significant deterioration in recent years. The region has erupted into civil unrest dozens of times since the Israeli withdrawal. The government, despite appearences, held no real power in the territory anyway. The government’s most important ability, that to negotiate with other countries, seems to have been squandered as key fights between Hamas and Fatah (politically, this time, not violently) bogged down the Palestinian legislative authority.

While the government was busy attempting to compromise, the violent thugs of Hamas and Islamist organizations scattered across the West Bank and Gaza gave the regions a constant feeling of chaos. Since Israel pulled out, Palestinian citizens have lived in constant fear, not quite sure who to support in the neverendnig war for power. Support Fatah when they’re popular, and you may fnid yourself executed as soon as Hamas rises to power. What’s more, the situation in the Palestinian territories truly shows how incapable the region is of properly governing itself. Since Israel’s withdrawal, the areas have been provided with constant Israeli and US aid in an effort to push the Palestians to greater world understanding and tolerance. When it was clear that these efforts were in vain, the US and Israel continued their policy, paying more attention to the people than their beliefs and politics.

Palestine has been given endless opportunities for growth. The country’s not an independent nation, but that may very well work to its benefit. As a part of Israel, citizens receive the opportunity to commute to major Israeli cities to work at jobs not available in Palestinian territories. Were the country independent, regional change, not just civil war, would result. Neighboring countries like Egypt and Jordan would feel reprocussions as well. In this instance, however, Israel may end up being Palestine’s saving grace. Israel has an obligation to promote peace and equality in all territories, even if the territories they strive to protect often attack them (see the intifada, etc.).

Israel, argues Liz, should not piece together an international force to bring peace to the Palestinian territories. As Ryan so eloquently noted, Israel is not in the wrong here. Over the past fifty year, they have time and time again demonstrated their ability to effectively run a government. Currently, Israel stands as a world pioneer in numerous markets and boasts one of the most developed markets in the Middle East. Liz claims the intrusions of Israel into Palestine, an area of their own country, is preventing progress in the region. The fault, however, is not Israel’s. Palestine has been given dozens of opportunities to reform and exist peacefully with the rest of the world. Instead, they have chosen violence and destruction.

At this stage, it’s too early to tell if Hamas’ victory will be permanent. The violence in the Palestinian territories has brought a new meaning to political dissent. Palestinians loyal to Fatah are being executed in droves, and Hamas has begun targeting key Fatah leaders to dismantle the opposition from the top. Palestine clearly does not understand the concept of democracy. Hamas purports that they, finally, have given a voice to the Palestinian majority, but instead of ruling a government, they are smothering any chance for an equitable and fair governmental arrangement in Palestine.

Interesting Link: A Palestinian-written editorial in YNetNews provides an interesting perspective on Israeli-Palestinian relations in light of the current conflict

Popularity: 49% [?]

I’m at the Personal Democracy Forum at Pace University in New York City right now watching a group seminar with Jay Rosen, Mike Connell, Jeff Jarvis, and Walter Fields. I’ll be publishing more thoughts about this morning’s sessions and what was said later this evening and over the weekend. Jay Rosen, founder of NewAssignment.net and AssignmentZero, is discussing both projects and his new partnership with the Huffington Post. Today, Rosen has given the project a name. OfftheBus, the project’s new name, will be a collaboration between NewAssignment.net and the Huffington Post in an effort to bring the public the best election coverage. Arianna Huffington was unable to make PdF today although she was a scheduled speaker. Rosen cited that he believed that having over forty independent bloggers in cities around the country to cover the elections would be a far better alternative than having one journalist stay with the presidential campaign.

The new website will help to foster new media interaction in the presidential campaigns, something that’s been sorely lacking in recent campaigns. Will 2008 be the year of the democratization of election coverage? According to several of the panelists, new breakthroughs in media and pilot projects like Rosen’s NewAssignment and AssignmentZero signal what’s to come. Jeff Jarvis, both an old media pioneer and a champion of new media causes, seems to approve of Rosen’s new project with several reservations. The audience seems to have come to the same consensus. Only time, however, will tell if the distributed reporting in the 2008 elections will hold up to that of professional reporters.

Popularity: 80% [?]

We’re already about twenty minutes into the debate sponsored by MSNBC/Politico.com, and I’ll be periodically updating this blog entry with my latest impressions. So far, we’ve seen a variety of MSNBC-chosen questions, and there’s been a round of questions submitted by users of the popular political website Politico.com [I'll be writing about the importance of the interactive round shortly]. I’ve been a little disgusted with the frequency of Reagan references, but, after all, it’s a Republican debate at the Reagan Library, so I guess one shouldn’t expect anything else. Ronald Reagan wasn’t, however, the country’s greatest president, and I don’t see why all of the candidates continually refer to his greatness in practically every area of governance. I’ll be dropping general opinions into several paragraphs and I’ll keep candidate specific entries at the bottom. Lire le reste de cet article »

Popularity: 34% [?]

Last week, after calling the African-American members of the Rutgers University women’s basketball team “nappy-headed hos,” Don Imus was fired in a storm of controversy. Imus’ comments prompted a frank discussion of race in America. Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, two black individuals at the head of the African-American lobby, immediately chalked up Imus’ comment to overall racist sentiments. They called for rallies and boycotts. Imus, simulcast on MSNBC and broadcast over CBS radio, faced a two-week suspension for his misconduct. Sharpton, even after interviewing Imus, refused to back down. Reacting to pressure, MSNBC fired Imus. Several days later, Les Moonves, the President of CBS, did the same, claiming that the network didn’t support the racial injustices Don Imus had mentioned.

The incident, however, seems to have stirred up activists throughout the country. It’s not out of character for “shock jocks” like Don Imus to discuss controversial topics. Rush Limbaugh, perhaps the best known conservative commentator, has been caught doing far worse. Limbaugh’s numerous offenses include criminal acts (illegal painkillers). What’s worse, however, is the way he speaks on the radio, often maligning those who don’t think the way he does. Unlike Don Imus, who most view as an “equal opportunity offender,” Limbaugh offends only those who dare to disagree with him. Groups that come to mind include blacks, homosexuals, and liberals. Imus, however, makes one slip-up and he’s without a job.

I’m not doubting Imus’ malfeasance. It is, however, rather shocking how quickly the entire ordeal was over. I find Al Sharpton’s immediate success with this issue disheartening. Days after he threatened a boycott for advertisers on Imus’ program, Don Imus was fired. CBS and MSNBC should have stood up for Imus, a character who brought them millions of dollars in advertising revenue throughout the years. The networks, afraid to lose millions, canceled Imus’ recently signed (5-year $50 million) contract. Standing up for free speech wasn’t a priority. As is the case with most corporations, profit was the priority. Yet the two networks failed to stand up for a principal that their very organizations rely on. Caving quickly to Sharpton’s pressure shows the existence of an overly strong race lobby. Never should one organization be able to fell a giant corporation like MSNBC or CBS.

Sharpton’s actions are besides the point, however. What shocked me about the situation is the new double standard, this time one overwhelmingly in favor of minorities. For hundreds of years, blacks fought for equality. I’ll be the first to admit we’re far from it. Creating a double standard with affirmative action, however, is not the way out. Several commentators, among them the conservative Michelle Malkin, have drawn attention to the words contained in rap music. “Ho,” the word Imus used, appears dozens of times in popular rap songs.

Disrespecting women and blacks seems to be the norm in rap music today. The n-word, once taboo (as it should be), has begun appearing in rap songs. Several pundits claim rap music publicizes rather sordid aspects of our society, including drug dealing and violence. Yet rappers like Mims, whose new top 10 hit “This is Why I’m Hot” single includes (by my count) six mentions of the n-word in four minutes of music, go unpunished. The aforementioned article by Michelle Malkin has YouTube videos of several other offensive songs.

Sharpton, just like the rappers, enjoys immunity when it comes to racial issues. As he criticizes Imus, rappers record new songs with the very same parlance he sought to ban from the airwaves. America, for some reason, sees the music industry and pop culture as exempt from the tolerance status quo. While the rest of America must adhere to a strict set of racial tolerance guidelines, the music industry is free to parade racial slurs and degrading images all over our television sets.

The double standard is visible yet again in the Duke rape case. The case, stoked by racial issues, made national news and provoked critiques from Sharpton. Sharpton’s somewhat inflammatory comments fueled the fire that snowballed into national news. Last week, however, the Duke students were acquitted of all charges. Now, the prosecutor in the case, Attorney General Michael Nifong, faces a lawsuit for misconduct. Yet the most vocal critics of the Duke students, Al Sharpton and others, have yet to come forward. Imus himself, several days before his show was cancelled, wondered where Sharpton’s apology was.

It’s clear that something has to be done to race relations in the US in order to move on. Hate-fueled incidents like those caused by Imus and the purported Duke rape case continue to fill our media. It shouldn’t be this way. Unfortunately, nobody’s leading the charge for equality. Activists like Al Sharpton demand more than equality. They demand the double standard; one that’s clearly shown itself in Imus’ proceedings. One can only hope that the future will destroy this new impediment to racial equality and bring real equality to all Americans.

Popularity: 41% [?]

The shooting at Virginia Tech is undeniably one of the worst tragedies American students have ever faced.  Stories of heroism make their way out of the situation, but the media is focused on the death and destruction caused on the campus of Virginia Tech University. One thing, however, should give Virginia Tech students, and Americans throughout the country, something to be proud of.  In the absence of professional newsmen, students took control of the media, showing an unprecedented ability to shape the coverage regarding their event.

In the wake of the worst campus massacre ever in the United States, dozens of news organizations flocked to Virginia to cover the tragedy. Before they arrived, however, the mainstream media relied on reports from those already on the ground: the college students themselves. Armed with the video and still cameras on their mobile phones, dozens of students set out to create their own coverage of an incident that was very much their own. The first audio and video accounts of the incident aired by CNN came from iReport, their citizen journalism program. The video, shot on a Nokia smartphone, made its way around the networks, all courtsey of a Virginia Tech student named Jamal Albarghouti.

Dozens of similar stories are to be told. In the hours preceding the arrival of professional reporters, Virginia Tech students had, unfortunately, the opportunity to shape the world’s news. Their coverage helped to show the world how terrible the massacre was and helped to qualm some fears about students that were safe. Twitter, a “stream of consciousness” blogging tool by Obvious Corp (utilized mostly by web celebrities such as Robert Scoble and Thomas Hawk), served constant updates to the internet, courtesy of a user named Tom Markiewicz. Chris Pirillo, a web celebrity in his own right, helped to stream live coverage with a tool called UStream.tv. His conversation with Planet Blacksburg, a new student-run publication from Virginia Tech, captured nationwide attention as sections were aired on various evening news programs.

What most surprised me, however, was the caliber and tenacity of the coverage coming from the students themselves at Virginia Tech. Via the aforementioned Planet Blackburg, they helped to broadcast news of the tragedy throughout the world, becoming the go-to site for immediate updates. The Web2.0 movement, which many experts see as a bubble ready to burst, finally showcased its effectiveness yesterday. YouTube has showed its staying power by drawing users in to watch videos on their website. The entire citizen journalism movement, however, displayed its prominence yesterday with the Virginia Tech shooting. Never, in years past, would internet surfers be granted the same hard-hitting coverage as Planet Blacksburg provided yesterday.

In this day and age, everyone is a reporter. Yesterday, as CNN broadcast video from a student’s cellphone video, and as Planet Blacksburg updated faster than the almighty network news, it became apparent. The “new media” is here to stay, and, from the looks of it, it’s ready to provide better coverage than had ever been imagined. The shooting at Virginia Tech has caused incredible sadness and grief. It has, however, caused something else: the birth of a new generation of reporters.

News of the incident continues to stun the staff here at New School Politics. In the coming days, we’ll be doing everything we can to help, but for the moment, the best we can do is to give our condolences to those involved in the tragedy at Virginia Tech. On April 30th, we’ll be participating in One Day Blog Silence, a day of quiet on the blogosphere dedicated to the memory of those who lost their lives in this terrible tragedy.

Popularity: 84% [?]

America once again felt insecure today as 33 lives were taken on the campus of Virginia Tech University. Several notable things occurred in the immediate aftermath of the event. First came an outpouring of grief from Americans and foreign nationals. Governor Tim Kaine, away in Tokyo, immediately jumped on a plane to fly back to Virginia. The President of the United States read from a prepared statement. Campus officials held numerous press conferences to keep America briefed. As the gravity of the massacre became clear, America collectively wept for the deceased at Virginia Tech.

The inquest into the behavior of the Virginia Tech Police Department began next. An e-mail was sent to students approximately two hours after the first shooting occurred. Although it’s not immediately clear, one must wonder whether the two shootings are connected. If so, shouldn’t the college have taken more action? Several in the mainstream press have wondered. It’s not time for an investigation into misconduct just yet, however. What is important is an investigation into the motives and reasoning of the killer. Pajamas Media & Boing Boing have terrific ongoing coverage on the shooting while Planet Blacksburg, a student run publication, is the place to go for eyewitness accounts.

Some, however, weren’t content to leave the situation without debate. Immediately, the shooting was transformed into the trigger for a nationwide argument about gun control. If given more rights, could students with guns have protected themselves from the impending threat of a shooter on the loose? Dozens of blogs seem to be intent on debating the subject, paying little attention to the tragedy itself. Michelle Malkin, one of the conservative movement’s leading bloggers, seems to be leading the charge. Instapundit chimed in as well, noting that “had the bill [one that planned to allow college students and employees the right to carry handguns on campus], “things might have turned out differently.”  There is no official word on the weapon the gunman used, so gun control activists are unable to protest.  What if, however, the gunman was never allowed access to the gun in the first place?  I, similar to Eugene Volokh (of the Volokh Conspiracy), wonder whether it’s too soon to create debate. The nation has just witnessed the worst mass-shooting on a school campus in its history. It’s certainly too soon to stir up controversy.

Is That Legal? has more on the other tragedy, the shift from the massacre to a gun control argument. Along with President Bush, Govenor Kaine, and all of America, I send my sincere condolences to the victims of an attack that viciously took the lives of 32 college students and professors. I hope that this event will serve not as a catalyst for further debate but as a sign of our twisted society. May the victims and their families take solace in knowing that America is with them.

technorati tags:education, shooting, virginiatech, guncontrol

Popularity: 44% [?]