One can, perhaps, place Kipling more satisfactorily than by juggling with the words “verse” and “poetry” if one describes him simply as a good bad poet.
………………………………………………………………George Orwell

“Mr.[T.S.] Eliot describes Kipling’s metrical work as “verse” and not “poetry,” but adds that it is “great verse,” and further qualifies this by saying that a writer can only be described as a “great verse-writer” if there is some of his work “of which we cannot say whether it is verse or poetry.”

“At his worst, and also his most vital, in poems like “Gunga Din” or “Danny Deever,” Kipling is almost a shameful pleasure, like the taste for cheap sweets that some people secretly carry into middle life.  But even with his best passages one has the same sense of being seduced by something spurious, and yet unquestionably seduced.  Unless one is merely a snob and a liar it is impossible to say that no one who cares for poetry could get any pleasure out of such lines as:  “For the wind is in the palm-trees, and the temple-bells they say:/Come you back, you British soldier; come you back to Mandalay!” and yet those lines are not poetry in the same sense as “Felix Randal” [Hopkins] or “When icicles hang by the wall” [Shakespeare] are poetry.

“There is a great deal of good bad poetry in English, all of it, I should say, subsequent to 1790.  Examples of good bad poems–I am deliberately choosing diverse ones–are “The Bridge of Sighs,” “When all the World is Young, Lad,” “The Charge of the Light Brigade,” Bret Harte’s “Dickens in Camp,” “The Burial of Sir John Moore,” “Jenny Kissed Me,” “Keith of Ravelston,” “Casabianca.” All of these reek of sentimentality, and yet—not these particular poems, perhaps, but poems of this kind, are capable of giving true pleasure to people who can see clearly what is wrong with them.  One could fill a fair-sized anthology with good bad poems, if it were not for the significant fact that good bad poetry is usually too well known to be worth reprinting.  It is no use pretending that in an age like our own, “good” poetry can have any genuine popularity.  It is, and must be, the cult of a very few people, the least tolerated of the arts.  Perhaps that statement needs a certain amount of qualification.  True poetry can sometimes be acceptable to the mass of the people when it disguises itself as something else.  One can see an example of this in the folk-poetry that England still possesses, certain nursery rhymes and mnemonic rhymes, for instance, and the songs that soldiers make up, including words that go to some of the bugle-calls.  But in general ours is a civilization in which the very word “poetry” evokes a hostile snigger or, at best, the sort of frozen disgust that most people feel when they hear the word “God.”

“If you are good at playing the concertina you could probably go into the nearest public bar and get yourself an appreciative audience within five minutes.  But what would be the attitude of that same audience if you suggested reading them Shakespeare’s sonnets, for instance?  Good bad poetry, however, can get across to the most unpromising audience if the right atmosphere has been worked up beforehand.

“The fact that such a thing as good bad poetry can exist is a sign of the emotional overlap between the intellectual and the ordinary man.  The intellectual is different from the ordinary man, but only in certain sections of his personality, and even then not all the time.  But what is the peculiarity of a good bad poem? A good bad poem is a graceful momument to the obvious.  It records in memorable form–for verse is a mnemonic device, among other things–some emotion which very nearly every human being can share.  The merit of a poem like “When all the World is Young, Lad” is that, however sentimental it may be, its sentiment is “true” sentiment in the sense that you are bound to find yourself thinking the thought it expresses sooner or later; and then, if you happen to know the poem, it will come back into your mind and seem better than it did before.”

………………………………………………………………………..

–George Orwell, 1946

“Remake” and “original” are loaded words.

The Prisoner, AMC’s remake of the 1967 British series of the same name, is nothing like its predecessor.  Or at least that’s what I’m told—not having seen the first version, I watched the new miniseries with a mind wiped as clean of preconceptions as one of the brainwashed members of The Village.  And along with most of them, I liked what I saw—The Prisoner (2009) was a strong, character-driven, self-contained story: an original in its own right.

Brilliant, enigmatic, and utterly horrifying in the way all good dystopian science fiction is—the final scene alone was enough to bring up a wave of déjà vu from reading George Orwell’s Nineteen Eight-Four for the first time and naively imagining torture and death were the worst O’Brien could do to Winston (or in this case, Two to Six).

I was wrong.

Throughout the miniseries, Six’s single-minded dedication to escape—“I am not a number!” he cries on multiple occasions, “I’m a free man!”— is almost heartbreaking.  Mental conviction, Six (James Caviezel) insists during early episodes, is stronger than anything the manipulative leader of The Village, Two (Ian McKellan, in a terrifying departure from the grandfatherly Gandalf), can throw at him.

But the theme of The Prisoner seems to be that the mind is not as secure a vault as we might imagine.  Six, after all, can’t even remember the name he supposedly had in his supposed other life and its supposed other world.  Any evidence he or any other number in the village has is as fragile as the wisp of a dream left after waking up—literally.  “Dreamers,” who draw fragments of their other lives on scraps of paper (the Statue of Liberty, a stick figure with a bag over its head), are disruptive elements in a society that sees them as crazy.

Add self-doubt to the mix and getting out starts to look impossible for the increasingly irresolute Six.

From my own experience, I’d say viewers can relate—as Six attempts to piece together memory fragments of a creepy corporate life at a mysterious surveillance company called Summakor (and his own quitting, even though “Nobody resigns from Summakor”), we’re trying to straighten out the plot from a thoroughly disjointed, non-linear story structure.  Episode one, “Arrival,” I’ll warn you, is nearly incomprehensible.

It’s not easy for anyone to straighten out the mysteries of The Village—neither us nor its own denizens—but the nonlinear narrative is as masterfully done an example of television text painting as I’ve ever seen.  The series, after all, is all about manipulating the human mind.

And no one’s better at that than Two, whose “death-cold eyes” (as described by one terrified villager) and gelid calm are absolutely convincing—I’m pretty sure smiling benignly while playing catch with a grenade is something only an elder statesman of drama like Sir Ian McKellan could pull off.

The rest of the cast, as well, is stellar, successfully portraying incredible depths of characterization (careful! some spoilers below) —

Two’s son, 11-12 (Jamie Campbell-Bower) shifts chillingly between the frigid self-possession of his father and the tortured confusion he picked up from Six;

Ruth Wilson’s self-composure as 313 is flawless, until the total disassociation of her “real” self from the “real” world is revealed, and makes a jarring contrast;

And Caviezel’s disorientation and resolution to escape are through the early episodes are utterly believable—only makes his ultimate end even more horrifying (here’s a hint: remember Winston Smith?).

But The Prisoner recalls Aldous Huxley as much as George Orwell: Two’s seemingly sincere belief that he can “help” people, perfect humans against their will, makes The Village as brave a new world as Huxley imagined for London of the 26^th century.

“The great war is psychological.  It’s in here,” Two insists, tapping his head.  And he’s right—not just in terms of the control he exerts over the minds of Six, 313, and his son 11-12 (for a while, at least).

“Postmodern” nonlinear editing doesn’t mean that the themes aren’t relevant, or predictive rather than contemporary—The Prisoner’s emphasis on the difference (or lack thereof?) between what’s real and what’s a construct is a very modern moral dilemma in an age when scientific and technological advances blur the line between the “real” the synthetic.

(Is 313’s love natural, or manufactured?  And even if it is a product of Two’s nefarious gene therapy, does that make it less real now that she does feel it?  Does The Village exist in any physical space, or just the mind?  Does it make a difference?)

In any case—with a disjointed structure, an just-barely-comprehensible storyline, a nightmarish conclusion, and a concept disconcertingly contemporary, watching AMC’s The Prisoner was something like having a bad dream, only to wake up and shudder that it could be possible.

But if Nineteen Eighty-Four or Brave New World are any sort of examples (or Shakespeare’s tragedies, or Euripides’, or Sophocles’…), dystopia and tragedy have a long shelf life.

I’m definitely buying the DVD.

China’s Golden Shield Project has several US corporations such as IBM, General Electric, and Honeywell working closely with the Chinese government to install millions of surveillance cameras throughout the country, along with advanced video analysis and facial recognition software, which will identify and track individuals everywhere they go. They will be connected to a centralised database and monitoring station, which will, upon completion of the project, contain a picture of the face of every person in China – over 1.3 billion people.

Law enforcement and intelligence services in the UK and the US possess technology to remotely activate the microphones in cellphones, by accessing the phone’s diagnostic/maintenance features, in order to listen to conversations that take place nearby the person who holds the phone. Mobile phones are also commonly used to collect location data.

In the US, for instance, under the Communications Assistance For Law Enforcement Act, all phone calls, VoIP and broadband internet traffic (emails, web traffic, instant messaging, etc) are required to be available for unimpeded real-time monitoring by federal law enforcement agencies. Computers are also a surveillance target because of the personal data stored on them. If someone is able to install software (either physically or remotely), such as the FBI’s “Magic Lantern” and Computer and IP verification (CIPAV), on a computer system, they can easily gain unauthorised access to this data. Another form of computer surveillance, known as TEMPEST, involves reading electromagnetic emanations from computing devices in order to extract data from them at distances of hundreds of meters.

Surveillance cameras are often connected to a recording device, IP network, and/or watched by a security guard/law enforcement officer. In the UK, for instance, there are about 4.2 million surveillance cameras — one camera for every 14 people. (via How other countries fare).

The Red Rage

There is a increasing chorus in India that such a ‘surveillance’ regime is needed in India also. A undermanned police managed a low crime society in India till now. The excuse of terrorism is being used to advance the case for a police state in India also – like the UK, USA, China etc.

Lalgarh has proved one thing – purusharth in India is still alive and well. Moksh मोक्ष is the ultimate aim of all humans – and the meaning of moksh is freedom, emancipation, deliverance. Moksh is one of the four objectives (धर्म अर्थ, काम, मोक्ष)in the Indian ethical code of पुरुषार्थ.

Santhals and the British

In Lalarh, middle aged Santhal women, armed with spears, axes and knives came out to battle a repressive state which sold out to Big Business. For nearly a 100 years, a 100 years ago, the same Santhals had fought the British Raj earlier. When so many women come out in the open, with bows and arrows, one thing is clear.

There are more where they come from.

The excuse for extending power

So, whether it is Red Rage or Green Jihad, the State just needs an excuse to extend its power – and this surveillance is one part of it.

“La realidad existe en la mente humana y en ningún otro sitio. No en la mente individual, que puede cometer errores y que, en todo caso, perece pronto. Sólo la mente del Partido, que es colectiva e inmortal, puede captar la realidad. Lo que el Partido sostiene que es verdad es efectivamente verdad. Es imposible ver la realidad sino a través de los ojos del Partido. Este es el hecho que tienes que aprender, Winston. Para ello se necesita un acto de autodestrucción, un esfuerzo de la voluntad. Tienes que humillarte si quieres volverte cuerdo”.

1984, de George Orwell.

Si sustituimos la palabra “Partido” por “medios de comunicación” y releemos el texto, nos daremos cuenta de que no estaba tan equivocado Orwell cuando predijo la dictadura que asolaría a la sociedad de finales del siglo XX, principios del XXI. Hoy día todo lo que sabemos y todo lo que no sabemos sobre el mundo se lo debemos exclusivamente a los medios. A veces, eso sí, tenemos que resignarnos ante lo mucho que desconocemos por informaciones sesgadas, parciales o manipuladas, o por la falta de cobertura de asuntos “que carecen de interés” para el Partido los propios medios. Es entonces cuando tienes que humillarte para no volverte loco a base de preguntas que jamás podremos responder por nosotros mismos.

Y es que, como diría O’Brien, “nada hay al margen del Partido”. Ni siquiera los blogueros, que viven -vivimos-, inmersos en redes sociales de grandes compañías comunicativas, y que basamos el 99% de nuestras propias entradas -que creemos al margen de los medios convencionales- hablando de lo que dice la propia prensa.

Pero da igual. Dedica tu vida a comprar, vivir y salir, para así ser tan feliz como la gente que aparece en los anuncios de la tele, y deja que otros digan por ti cuáles son los temas que deben interesarte y la forma en la que te la deben contar.

More than three-quarters of young black men aged between 18 and 35 are on the system, the report said. Set up in 1995, the database contains the DNA profiles of five million citizens, eight percent of the population, making it the world’s biggest in proportion to population size. “Parliament has never formally debated the establishment of the National DNA Database and safeguards around it,” commission chairman Professor Jonathan Montgomery said in a statement.

“It has developed through amendments to laws designed to regulate the taking of fingerprints and physical evidence before DNA profiling was developed.

“It is not clear how far holding DNA profiles on a central database improves police investigations.” (via U.K. cops arrest people ‘just for the DNA’ – Europe- msnbc.com).

Big brother is definitely here

As post-WW2 European society was taking shape, one man warned the world – Big Brother Is Watching You! George Orwell’s 1984, a simple, dark and melancholic book warned the world of the spectre of a police state looming over the world.

The book was portrayed as warning against the ‘impending’ threat of Communism. George Orwell himself joined the British Government in its propaganda effort during WW2.

Would George Orwell have imagined that Britain, the citadel of freedom, itself would becoming the Mother Of Big Brother societies – with the largest number surveillance cameras and DNA data bank and a back-breaking prison population.

I wonder!

In the land of the free

The US prison population at more than 20 lakhs (2 million) is travesty of justice and humanity. The US competes with China and the erstwhile USSR, (the largest totalitarian regimes) in the world, with its rate of incarceration.

USA, with a population of 30 crores (300 million), has a criminal population of 70 lakhs (7 million) – behind bars, on probation or on parole. US Government estimates a figure of 20 lakhs (2 million) people serving prison sentences.

A concerned editorial in New York Times newspaper summed up the situation.

More than 1 in 100 American adults are behind bars. One in nine black men, ages 20 to 34, are serving time, as are 1 in 36 adult Hispanic men. Nationwide, the prison population … (of the US) surpasses all other countries for which there are reliable figures. The 50 states last year spent about $44 billion in tax dollars on corrections, up from nearly $11 billion in 1987. Vermont, Connecticut, Delaware, Michigan and Oregon devote as much money or more to corrections as they do to higher education.

Persuading public officials to adopt a more rational, cost-effective approach to prison policy is a daunting prospect, however, not least because building and running jailhouses has become a major industry.

… the relationship between imprisonment and crime control is murky. States that lagged behind the national average in rising incarceration rates during the 1990’s actually experienced a steeper decline in crime rates than states above the national average … (ellipsis and bracketed text mine).

Across the pond

Some time back there was another report, on the state of prisons in UK.

There are almost 10,000 Muslims in Britain’s jails— with 90 of them serving time for terror offences … they fear more and more young lags are being converted and radicalised in prison. A … source said: “You are talking about rootless young men at the bottom of society. They’re in jail and someone gives them some purpose. ”

In top-security jails such as Whitemoor, Cambs, 35 per cent of inmates are Muslim—and they have converted numerous other prisoners to Islam. (via MI5 spy chiefs are putting undercover officers into Britain’s jails | News Of The World).

Slice and dice …

Britain has an estimated 1.6 million Muslims – a 2.8% of the British population. Of this a 10,000 are in prison – which means about 0.6% of the British Muslim population is in prison. India has 16 crore Muslims – which a 100 times higher population.

What if …

The British policy of imprisonment, if India were to follow, Indian Muslims inside prisons would be in 10 lakhs (or 1 million). India’s total prison population ranges between 2.5 lakhs to 3.5 lakhs – of all peoples, of all religions, races, crimes etc.

Of course, Indian society handles crime vastly differently. Technically, India could create a legal system which would ease the ability of the police to imprison people, or better still hang them – and hide its social problems.

Freedom, imprisonment, racism, development, genocide

What is the difference between a ‘banana republic’ where people disappear – and in the Anglo-Saxon Bloc which has the world largest prison population? Maybe, my being from a backward country, stops me from understanding this great ‘progress’ that these countries seemed to have made!

The sight of the West, strutting as a protector of freedom on the global stage is a hoax. How can the West have a problem with Native American tribes (aka Red Indians) and the Aborigines – if there are none left. The West which has the highest levels of prison populations in the world – raucously reminds the world of lessons in freedom.

What is assimilation and integration

The West speaks of protecting individual freedom, whereas the calls for ‘assimilation’ integration are nothing but refurbished implementation of the ’settled’ principle in the Desert Bloc of Cuius regio, eius religio’ (meaning whose land, his religion; CRER) – the ruler decided his people’s religion.

The West can speak from both sides of the mouth. Nicholas Sarkozy can tell Indians (i.e.Manmohan Singh) to respect foreign missionaries, who want to convert Indians to their religion – while the West can continue with this demonization of Islam. Would Sarkozy like to mention any other country where such a large minority Muslim population, has greater freedom and opportunity, than in India? Would you like to suggest France instead?

This is freedom – from both sides. For the West.

Critchley in his talk at the New School makes some interesting points about the French group around the publication L’insurrection, and those theorising ‘zones of opacity’, ‘foci of desertion’ and various forms of anonymity in an increasingly monitored world. He also rightly identifies that ‘thought crime’ was the real charge against the Tarnac 9. Another way to smear those who for political reasons want to retain a certain opacity would be to lump them in with various genuine undesirables, as this article does. Critchley’s use of Orwell is no mere Godwin’s because Orwell predicted the subtle shift in the burden of suspicion that is slowly being realised today, not least around the issue of anonymity. It is not inconceivable that at some time in the future, failure to present one’s ‘authentic self’ and publicise the minutiae of one’s life via assorted social networking media will arouse suspicion of criminality, including the crime of sedition which may equally likely become synonymous with political opposition. After all, if you are innocent you surely have nothing to hide.

People outside the UK, especially in developing courtiers starve for democracy and admire the people living in democratic countries which pledges citizens human rights, freedom and so on. I ,as a foreigner, came to the UK with these expectations, was surprised by the huge efforts made by the government to surveillance. That is, people are being watched all the time over everything they do.

This reminds me of the George Orwell’s novel 1984. It describes the society in which everyone is being watched by authorities mainly through telescreen. Isn’t it the situation we are living in now? I remember one of my lecturer said that on the way to the Tesco which just took you 5 minutes, you would be filmed 300 times by the surveillance camera. That is not the only way of surveillance by the government. Just in recent years, the foreigners holding a UK visa not matter you are students or workers, you have to enroll the biometrics. Every time you move to another city to house, you have to report to the police station to make sure that you are totally under their control. Failure to do so, you will be charged or imprison.

The native people are no better than the foreigners. I read the news the other day on BBC website. It said there are about 5 million profiles on national DNA database within which nearing 1 million are innocent. Also, the DNA database has highly disproportionate impact on different ethnic groups, especially the young black man who are over-represented (almost 40% of black men have their DNA profiles on database). Is this necessary? As the shadow home office minister said,

under labor surveillance society, everyone is a potential suspect

I really agree with him. Is it fair for the innocent appearing on the database? How uncomfortable is that?

It does not just stop there. the local council in harrow set up cameras for every house to tackle the anti-social and criminal activities. In the name of the so-called “make you feel safer”, the “snooping culture” will emerge in my point of view. Does this culture make people living in the community feel safer?  People have to sacrifice their freedom and their privacy to make sure the safety of the whole community in which they will live a cautious lives. How the trust between neighbors can be built. I doubt that. I also doubt the effectiveness of these surveillance. Do the surveillance cameras and DNA database help the police catch more criminal?

Anyway, when we go out, remember “the big brother is watching you”, we have to get used to it.

George Orwell, author of “1984”, once wrote: “Who controls the past controls the future; who controls the present controls the past.”

Such holds true about the history of “Thanksgiving.” Those who are indigenous to the land we now call the “United States of America” have been long misrepresented, demonized, and effectively marginalized in American history textbooks in favor of glorifying European colonialism. Why does a democracy, such as ours, refuse to teach that 10 to 30 million Natives were unjustifiably slaughtered in the name of conquest and imperialism? Where is our “free market of ideas” when selective and biased history is being taught in our educational institutions?

There is no other way to put it, but erasing the memory of an entire race of people is systematic racism. Not only is biased history presented to us through a distorted lens, but we are also subjected to an ever-growing culture of capitalism, in which commercialization of an ambiguous holiday merely pulls us away from facts and meaning. Turkeys are associated with “Thanksgiving” in the same way Santa Clause and the Easter bunny have become synonymous with Christmas and Easter, respectively. Through the guise of innocence, capitalism is constantly telling us to consume because consumption equals “happiness.” It is no coincidence that we all rush to our favorite malls and shopping centers on “Black Friday” for “big savings.”

And as children dress up as Pilgrims and Natives to reenact the romanticized version of history, they are not only perpetuating stereotypes, but more importantly, they’re embodying racist and ethnocentric lies. What do they really know about the Pilgrims and the Natives? Consider a high school history textbook called “The American Tradition” which describes the scene quite succinctly:

After some exploring, the Pilgrims chose the land around Plymouth Harbor for their settlement. Unfortunately, they had arrived in December and were not prepared for the New England winter. However, they were aided by friendly Indians, who gave them food and showed them how to grow corn. When warm weather came, the colonists planted, fished, hunted, and prepared themselves for the next winter. After harvesting their first crop, they and their Indian friends celebrated the first Thanksgiving.

This patronizing version of history excludes many embarrassing facts of European history. As stated by James W. Loewen, author of “Lies My Teacher Told Me,” many college students are unaware of the horrific plague that devastated and significantly reduced the population of Natives after Columbus’ arrival in the “new world.” Most diseases, for instance, came from animals that were domesticated by Europeans. Cowpox from cows led to smallpox, which was later “spread through gifts of blankets by infected Europeans.” Of the twelve high school textbooks Professor Loewen studied and analyzed, only three offer some explanation that the plague was a factor of European colonization. The nine remaining textbooks mention almost nothing, and two of them omit the subject altogether. He writes: “Each of the other seven furnishes only a fragment of a paragraph that does not even make it into the index, let alone into students’ minds.”

Why is it important to mention the plague? Quite simply, it reinforced European ethnocentrism and hardly produced a “friendly” relationship between the Natives and Europeans. To most of the Pilgrims and Europeans, the Natives were heathens, savages, treacherous, and Satanic. Upon seeing thousands of dead Natives, the Governor of Massachusetts Bay Colony, John Winthrop, called the plague “miraculous.” In 1634, he wrote to a friend in England:

But for the natives in these parts, God hath so pursued them, as for 300 miles space the greatest part of them are swept away by the small pox which still continues among them. So as God hath thereby cleared our title to this place, those who remain in these parts, being in all not fifty, have put themselves under our protect…

The ugly truth is that many Pilgrims were thankful and grateful that the Native population was decreasing. Even worse, there was the Pequot Massacre in 1637, which started after the colonists found a murdered white man in his boat. Ninety armed settlers burned a Native village, along with their crops, and then demanded the Natives to turn in the murderers. When the Natives refused, a massacre followed.

Captain John Mason and his colonist army surrounded a fortified Pequot village and reportedly shouted: “We must burn them! Such a dreadful terror let the Almighty fall upon their spirits that they would flee from us and run into the very flames. Thus did the Lord Judge the heathen, filling the place with dead bodies.” The surviving Pequot were hunted and slain.

The Governor of Plymouth, William Bradford, further elaborates:

Those that escaped the fire were slain with the sword; some hewed to pieces, others run through with their rapiers, so that they were quickly dispatched and very few escaped. It was conceived they thus destroyed about 400 at this time. It was a fearful sight to see them thus frying in the fire…horrible was the stink and scent thereof, but the victory seemed a sweet sacrifice, and they gave the prayers thereof to God, who had wrought so wonderfully for them.

Perhaps most disturbing: it is strongly argued by many historians that the Pequot Massacre led to the “Thanksgiving” festivities. The day after the massacre, the aforementioned Governor Massachusetts Bay Colony declared: “A day of Thanksgiving, thanking God that they had eliminated over 700 men, women and children.” It was signed into law that, “This day forth shall be a day of celebration and thanksgiving for subduing the Pequots.”

Now, one may ask: What about Squanto, the Wampanoag man who learned to speak English and helped the hungry, ill, and poor Pilgrims? As cited by Professor Loewen, an American high school textbook called “Land of Promise” reads:

Squanto had learned their language, the author explained, from English fishermen who ventured into the New England waters each summer. Squanto taught the Pilgrims how to plant corn, squash, and pumpkins. Would the small band of settlers have survived without Squanto’s help? We cannot say. But by the fall of 1621, colonists and Indians could sit down to several days of feast and thanksgiving to God (later celebrated as the first Thanksgiving).

Note that this text states the first Thanksgiving was on 1621. Indeed, there was a feast on that year, but it was not called a “Thanksgiving feast” nor was it repeated until years later after the Pequot Massacre in 1637. In regards to Squanto, the correct question to ask is: How did Squanto learn English? History textbooks neglect to mention that the Europeans did not perceive Squanto as an equal, but rather as “an instrument of their God” to help the “chosen people.” It is also omitted that, as a boy, Squanto was stolen by a British captain in 1605 and taken to England. He worked for a Plymouth Merchant who eventually helped him arrange passage back to Massachusetts, but less than a year later, he was seized by a British slave raider. Along with two dozen fellow Natives, Squanto was sold into slavery in Spain. He would manage to escape slavery, journey back to England, and then talk a ship captain into taking him along on his next trip to Cape Cod in 1619.

As Squanto walked back into his home village, he was horrified to find that he was the only surviving member of his village. The rest were either killed in battle or died of illness and disease. Excluding Squanto’s enslavement is to paint an incredibly distorted version of history that suggests Natives, like Squanto, learned English for no other reason but to help the colonists. It is to glorify the Europeans and erase the struggles and experiences of the Native people.

When history is transformed into myths, tales, and bedtime stories, we ignore historical research that enables us to learn valuable and meaningful lessons about our present, as well as about our future. History is meant to be an accurate and honest account of civilizations, cultures, and events; not a one-sided narrative of ethnocentric and selective alterations.

As Professor Loewen states:

Thanksgiving is full of embarrassing facts. The Pilgrims did not introduce the Native Americans to the tradition; Eastern Indians had observed autumnal harvest celebrations for centuries. Our modern celebrations date back only to 1863; not until the 1890s did the Pilgrims get included in the tradition; no one even called them ‘Pilgrims’ until the 1870s.

I did not write this article with intentions to offend or say we shouldn’t celebrate “Thanksgiving.” None of us are responsible for the atrocities committed hundreds of years ago. None of us caused the plague or the massacres. But as human beings, I do feel that it’s important for us to approach history with honesty and integrity. Yes, we should spend time with our families and Loved ones, and yes, we should be grateful and thankful for all that we have, but not at the expense of ignoring an entire race of people, their culture, and their history. A hopeful and optimistic view comes from Jacqueline Keeler, a Native American, who writes:

I see, in the “First Thanksgiving” story, a hidden Pilgrim heart. The story of that heart is the real tale than needs to be told. What did it hold? Bigotry, hatred, greed, self-righteousness? We have seen the evil that it caused in the 350 years since. Genocide, environmental devastation, poverty, world wars, racism. Where is the hero who will destroy that heart of evil? I believe it must be each of us. Indeed, when I give thanks this Thursday and I cook my native food, I will be thinking of this hidden heart and how my ancestors survived the evil it caused. Because if we can survive, with our ability to share and to give intact, then the evil and the good will that met that Thanksgiving day in the land of the Wampanoag will have come full circle. And the healing can begin.

The fact that history textbooks and schools try to glorify the Pilgrims while omitting significant facts about the Natives represents that there is a lot to improve in the United States. Let us not become blinded by super-patriotism or the blowout sales of “Black Friday.” Let us be conscious of our brothers and sisters in humanity, learn about their contributions, and embolden ourselves to stand up against racism and genocide in all forms.

Peace.

~ Jehanzeb

This month, it’s been 20 years since the Berlin Wall came down and the Iron Curtain of Communism over Russia and Eastern Europe.

I don’t know if you are old enough (anyone over 30) to remember when Russia and Eastern Europe comprised the world’s largest prison right behind the “People’s Republic” of China, but, it was a time fear to live in the US. It was worse than even the events of 9/11.

There was a fear of imminent Nuclear War. The early 1980s were a time of anxiety as the arms race between the US and the former Soviet Union continued and President Reagan said things like the Soviet Union was the “evil empire” and books and movies depicted very realistic Nuclear War scenarios. I once heard the local test siren go off one week shortly after reading a book and seeing a movie about nukes, and I literally thought the Russians were attacking! I thought it was only a matter of time that one side or the other would do something stupid and the situation would degenerate into the end of life on Earth very quickly.

When the Wall came down in 1989 along with the freeing of Eastern Europe and later Russia from Communism it was like a blessing to those who can still remember it.  It was a reprieve from the constant fear of “war” and the end of half of Europe being under a dictatorship so huge and pervasive it seemed it would never end.

For me, the joy did not last as my targetting was just gearing up then, and I was made so miserable and un-free by tiny gradations day by day I did not feel the joy. Soon, my life got so dark I even envied the people in the former Iron Curtain countries even though I did not know the source of the shadow.

I new and sinister idea just occurred to me.  What if the “Wall Came Down” not because “freedom” had won over “oppression” but that the technology for total world tracking of each and every individual on Earth had become a reality so the tyrants of the Eastern Bloc thought it safe to let the little citizens out of their cages?  In other words, “freedom” had died in the “free” countries (where it did not really even exist for many even before then) so it was “safe” to let oppressed people to have free run of the cage that had become Earth.

In other words contained Communism morphed into world Fascism.  In essence, totalitarianism with shopping malls.

Many long term targets noticed their targetting starting around the late 80s/early 90s term of Dubya’s father, number 41.  Mine started right around the time the “election season” was starting about a year before the 1988 election.  I’m thinking the “End of Communism” was a planned event by the globalists so the little suckers like you and me could think “freedom” won over oppression.

It didn’t.  For the first time, I think, the perp controllers had the system in place to track anyone anytime anywhere and read their mind as well.  No need for an “arms race” or a “Cold War”.  Arab terrorists replaced the face of the enemy for most “free” people and the transition was as smooth as butter.  Now, they are the enemies to fear and flag wave over.

Who will be the enemy of the future?  Us.  Ordinary citizens selected and persecuted at first in secret and then everywhere.  In a way, we already are the “enemy” of all the people.  We are selected and harassed and tortured without a reason, without any charges being brought against us and without any recourse or even an opportunity to tell our stories in a court of law.  We are charged, convicted and sentenced to a very dark restricted “life” even before we know what’ s happening.  Soon, the whole world will be under this sort of surveillance/punishment/reward scheme with variations.  The threat of total targetting (like we get where we have no friends anywhere) will keep them in line along with the threat of concentration camps or whatever else they come up with. Only the citizen spies and “party members” will have it a little better.

After that, the devil will set up his world leader.

Doug Hoffman, who narrowly lost the congressional race in NY District 23 to Bill Owens, has declared that the election is over and there will be no recount. This comes after numerous errors were committed election night, Nancy Pelosi certifying Bill Owens the winner, before he was certified by the state of New York, in time to vote for the Health Care Bill, and known software bugs or tampering with of the controversial Sequoia voting machines.

Doug Hoffman, on one level this was your decision to make. However, we are in different times. This is not the country your parents knew.

We have entered a new world, a post Nazi takeover, Orwellian world where being polite or naively playing the gentleman card as Nevile Chamberlain did with the Germans, will result in catastrophe. On a higher level, Mr. Hoffman, this is the decision of New York residents and ultimately the American people. Regardless of your actions or your next move, this serious breach of the public trust, must be investigated. As I and others have stated, Barack Obama, the Obama camp and Obama thugs, including, but not limited to ACORN and SEIU, stole the Democratic primaries and caucuses through election fraud and intimidation. With warnings issued early in 2008 about voting machines and possible control of them by Chavez’s Venezuela or muslim countries, and now the evidence from the NY District 23 election, God only knows the extent that voting machines altered vote counts in 2008. We must protect our elections going forward.

We must have an investigation. 

Dear Friends,
Today, Tuesday, November 24, 2009, it is with a heavy heart that we declare this election over.  We will formally end this election and not ask for a recount.  This was a difficult choice to make because so many people have put their faith, hope and aspirations into our campaign.
 Yes, there seem to have been many vote counting problems, missed vote counts and, as was recently reported by the Gouvernour Times, software problems in the computerized voting machines. Despite these incidents, I do not believe the voters of NY-23, or New Yorkers in general, would be well-served by a disruptive and costly recount that would most likely not change the election outcome.
 I know many are disappointed and even angry. To those I say now is not the time to look back, but to focus on the future and ensure that next year we win back this district decidedly. Know this decision was not an easy one. I did not want to let down those who worked so hard, donated so much and shared their enthusiasm for retaking our country with common-sense conservative values.
And rest assured, our energies are now directed toward 2010. This election, in which a third party candidate narrowly lost, showed that principles do matter.  Special interests do have an Achilles’ heel, the American people. Main-street conservatism’s voice is now echoing through the government chambers and boardrooms that shape America. By most measures, this campaign was a success and I have you all to thank for this. And all of us have to thank the Conservative Party of New York State for nominating a candidacy like ours.
We take away lessons from this year’s campaign that will make us stronger and more competitive in the future. Next time we will be better prepared. Many people forget that our campaign only began in earnest three months ago. Most campaigns of this stature take at least a year to prepare. In three months, we almost toppled an entrenched political system and successfully defied the conventional thinking of the elite political punditry. Citizen government is making a comeback in America.
I thank everyone who participated in this campaign and urge each one of you to stand with me in the future. We have a calling that we must answer. My opponent in this race quickly abandoned the promises he made to his voters. Within the first hour of being sworn in by Nancy Pelosi, Bill Owens broke 4 campaign promises — so much for change in Washington. We must resoundingly defeat him next year and, with your help, I promise to help restore our nation’s faith in elected officials when we win.
But there is more to do than just win back NY-23 in 2010. We must work to help other like-minded citizen candidates win across the country.  We need to make time to help other candidates who are working for the principles we hold dear — other fiscal, common-sense conservatives.  Together we can successfully take back our great nation, one legislator and one member at a time. We need more than one common-sense conservative voice in the echo chamber of liberal, spend thrift cacophony if we are to redirect our great country.
I would also like to commend those election commission officials who worked tirelessly and may have taken offense to an unfortunate and poorly worded fundraising email that was sent out toward the end of our campaign.  As we tried to make sense of the false vote counts and stories of software viruses in the voting machines, we never intended to imply the election commissioners had somehow acted improperly. This was never our intention and, on the contrary, the election commissioners went above and beyond to uphold their duty to ensure a fair election took place. I owe them a debt of gratitude for all they have done.
So where to now? Full speed ahead to 2010. This gives us time to carefully articulate and communicate thoughtful positions on issues that impact the great people of our district and ensure that our campaign promises are NOT broken.  Best of all, it allows me to work hand-in-hand with the many supporters who shared their ideas, their concerns and their dreams with me.
We need to continue to stand united because we cannot spend our way out of recession or tax our way to prosperity. We must continue to fight to protect our liberties and protect those who are yet to be born.  We must protect our country against terrorists and protect the sanctity of marriage. We must fix our corrupt tax code, our immigration policy and our educational system.  Most of all, we must defend the free enterprise system that made America the greatest and most prosperous country in the world.  Although I’m conceding an election today, I do it with the certainty that we will win back this seat a year from now.  I am certain of this because our mission is too big, the country’s problems too dire and the American people are too smart.
Thank you for all you have done and will continue to do. “We the people” are retaking America.

Doug Hoffman, this is bigger than you or the election in NY. We are at a crucial point in the history of this country. The actions we take now will determine the security and pursuit of life, liberty and happiness that our descendants and ultimately the entire world will enjoy.

Mr. Hoffman, you have chosen to end the election. I urge you to not end the cause.

Wells

What's on your mind, Big Brother? The little people want to know.

To say that 2008 and 2009 have exposed a crisis in global leadership is beyond understatement.  The lapses in judgment, both in government and in financial services, leading to this devastating economic crisis are arguably unforgivable.  Countless lives have been wrecked in a seeming single fell stroke for the sake of corporate greed, especially in the financial sector. We find ourselves repeatedly asking, “Who the heck is in charge?”  And if the global economy had any of the forward momentum that the Exxon Valdez had in 1989…We have to ask, “Have all the captains of this global ship been on a permanent infusion of vodka?”  We simply don’t deserve this kind of leadership.  We deserve far better.

From the constant erosion of, and final repeal of, central Glass–Steagall provisions to the acceptance of massive bonuses post-bailout.  The finger-prints of ruinous avarice are upon every key, every doorknob.  Everyday global citizens are left treading water without life preservers.  They weren’t the ones living lavishly on the party barge.  They were the one’s carrying the trays with martinis to the captains.  The captains got out in silk-lined life boats.

So what were the big-shots thinking?  That’s really the question.  Isn’t it?  Wouldn’t it be nice if we could have known what they were thinking before we handed them the keys to the ship?  Before we gave them license to drive our banks, our Senates, our corporations?  What might a driving test for corporate leadership look like?

Technology may one day enable us to set much higher standards for our leadership.

If 2008-2009 goes down in history as one of the greatest economic calamities of the century, there may be a watershed scientific footnote attached to 2008 well.  2008 may well go down as the year of the advent of mind-reading. A flurry of functional MRI research over the past few years culminated in researchers in Kyoto, Japan reading the visual cortices of subjects.  Computers at ATR Computational Neuroscience Laboratories successfully recreated rough duplicates of black and white letters that subjects saw with their eyes.  A spate of speculation and ethical debate soon followed.

I was less inspired by the visual aspect (dreams and such) than by the potential to read thought patterns in other parts of the mind. I suspect, for example, that an fMRI of Bernard Madoff’s frontal lobe would betray a sub-zero glacial landscape devoid of emotional activity (except possibly the pleasure of wealth mingled with a dash of uncontrollable rage at any personal loss).  The technology is unquestionably evolving to assess patterns like empathy.

2008 may well go down as the year of the advent of mind-reading.

One day soon we’ll be able to flash up a few photographs of physical or financial ruin and find out whether or not a subject gives a flying flip for anyone but themselves.  Want to know whether your potential new CEO cares about shareholders?  Customers?  Employees?  Slap ‘em in an fMRI and see whether their neurons go neon when others are in need or exclusively when they see their own personal pay-day at the end of the yellow brick road.

I think it should ultimately become a kind of driving test for large corporations (or governments).  The results should be made public, too.  It would be kind of like a drug test on steroids, particularly well suited to corporate governance.  Say you’ve got a big manufacturer swaggering into your sleepy little rural hamlet promising 3,000 new jobs in exchange for juicy tax breaks.  Demand that their 5 top executives take a spin in the fMRI and find out how loyal they’ll be in the next major recession.  If they don’t cut the mustard say, “Thanks, but we’re saving this dance for another.”

Think of it as spinning Orwell’s 1984 up on it’s head.  The internet is already rapidly democratizing information and injecting transparency in a way that will enable us to demand far more of leadership in the decades ahead. I call it “inverse accountability.” We’re just now learning to blog the good guys into leadership and the bad guys into oblivion.  In the future, maybe we’ll be able to peer inside Big Brother’s head and see how well his/her noodle functions before we hire or elect him.

Here’s to 4891,
SevenCell

-SevenCell
http://sevencell.wordpress.com

Frappé par une grippe qui devrait normalement être réservée aux cochons de ce monde, j’ai été forcé de garder la position horizontale durant toute une toute semaine.  Incapable de poser mes doigts sur le clavier de mon ordinateur, mon existence s’est limitée à lire un peu et à regarder la télévision beaucoup.  Les nuits courtes m’ont amené d’étranges cauchemars, j’ai même cru un moment que la maladie m’avait été infligée par les gouvernements et les chambres de commerce, un complot visant à m’empêcher de critiquer mon existence et m’invitant à reprendre les rangs de la ferme.  Napoléon est fort têtu: il fera tout en son pouvoir pour amener Boule de Neige à une docilité nécessaire…

Toutes ces heures passées devant le téléviseur ont provoqué un effet contraire.  Après avoir visionné les chaînes d’information en continu – qu’elles soient québécoises, canadiennes, américaines ou britanniques – je n’ai pas réussi à modifier mon interprétation du quotidien.  À l’exception de quelques bons films et de rares documentaires, je n’ai pas pu faire autrement que de constaster que la télévision est toujours le reflet de notre imbécilité. En réécoutant une vieille copie du documentaire “Manufacturing Consent“, j’ai au moins trouvé une explication à cette supercherie en couleurs, 24 heures sur 24, 7 jours sur 7: on nous veut confortablement engourdis.  Surtout avec l’arrivée de Noël, à 637 dollars par famille…

Je me sens beaucoup mieux.  Retour au boulot aujourd’hui, retour à la vie normale.  Le blogue devrait reprendre vie au cours des prochains jours.  Bien hâte de reprendre le dialogue.  Santé à vous.

Llegeixo La rebel·lió dels animals, de George Orwell (traduïda anys abans com a La revolta dels animals) i trobo que segueix essent una faula política i social de gran força. Quina validesa té? Sens dubte, és una anàlisi freda del trist resultat que va donar de si el comunisme real.

Però probablement també és una bona anàlisi, crua i escèptica, del procés històric que sembla anar en general de la revolució popular a la burgesa; ens parla de les revoltes que neixen del poble però tornen a crear una nova classe dirigent molt més afavorida que la dels escarrassos. Als trenta-quatre anys de mort Mr Franco, la premsa sembla dir-nos que la majoria no som més rics ni treballem menys, però en canvi hi ha uns pocs porcs que han engruixit molt bé; i encara ens duu notícies d’algun Napoleó que s’afanya a oferir-se com a Líder del mas comú. La lectura, sens dubte, és ben suggeridora encara avui.

• George Orwell, La rebel·lió dels animals, trad. de Melcion Mateu i Adrover i de Marc Rubió i Rodon (2003); Labutxaca, 2009, 144 p. (ISBN 978-84-96863-23-1).
• La revolta dels animals, trad. Eduard Cardona i Joaquim Ferrer Mallol (1964), Destino, 2001, 144 p. (ISBN 978-84-233-2342-5).

“Most people who bother with the matter at all would admit that the English language is in a bad way, but it is generally assumed that we cannot by conscious action do anything about it.  Our civilization is decadent and our language–so the argument runs–much inevitably share in the general collapse.  It follows that any struggle against the abuse of language is a sentimental archaism, like preferring candles to electric light or hansom cabs to aeroplanes.  Underneath this lies the half-conscious belief that language is a natural growth and not an instrument which we shape for our own purposes.” (77)

This is how George Orwell’s essay titled “Politics and the English Language” begins.  It can be found in his collection of essays Shooting an Elephant New York: Harcourt, Brace & World (1950), 77-92.  Now, while this essay is a commentary on political writing it is also packed full of great writing advice.  I originally came across it through a series of emails that were circulating on campus amongst the faculty and one suggested that we should all go back and review this essay.  Seeing as I had never read it I decided to give it a try. 

Near the beginning of the essay, Orwell gives five examples of poor political writing, which he later comments on in detail, but all have two common qualities: “staleness of imagery” and “lack of precision”.  He then goes on to illustrate the ways that prose-construction is avoided:

• “Dying metaphors.  A newly invented metaphor assists thought by evoking a visual image, while on the other hand a metaphor which is technically ‘dead’ . . . has in effect reverted to being an ordinary word and can generally be used without loss of vividness.  But in between these two classes there is a huge dump of worn-out metaphors which have lost all evocative power and are merely used because they save people the trouble of inventing phrases for themselves.” (80)
• “Operators or verbal false limbs.  These save the trouble of picking out appropriate verbs and nouns, and at the same time pad each sentence with extra syllables which give it an appearance of symmetry.” (80)
• “Pretentious diction . . . [results in] an increase in slovenliness and vagueness.” (81-2)
• “Meaningless words.“ (82)  Orwell describes this best, but I think the phrase is descriptive itself. 

Honestly, I recommend you take the time to read this essay.  It is a quick read and full of constructive advice.

“As I have tried to show, modern writing at its worst does not consist in picking out words for the sake of their meaning and inventing images in order to make their meaning clearer.  It consists of gumming together long strips of words which have already been set in order by someone else, and making the results presentable by sheer humbug.  The attraction of this way of writing is that it is easy.  It is easier–even quicker, once you have the habit–to say In my opinion it is not an unjustifiable assumption that than to say I think.” (85)

I love his sarcasm here:

“By using stale metaphors, similes and idioms, you save much mental effort, at the cost of leaving your meaning vague, not only for your reader but for yourself.” (85-6)

He quickly moves to further advice:

“A scrupulous writer, in every sentence that he writes, will ask himself at least four questions, thus:  What am I trying to say?  What words will express it?  What image or idiom will make it clearer?  Is this image fresh enough to have an effect?  And he will probably ask himself two more: Could I put it more shortly?  Have I said anything that is avoidably ugly?  But you are not obliged to go to all this trouble.  You can shirk it by simply throwing your mind open and letting the ready-made phrases come crowding in.” (86-7)

As he gets further into his commentary about political writing, Orwell does not hide his opinion:

“The great enemy of clear language is insincerity.  When there is a gap between one’s real and one’s declared aims, one turns as it were instinctively to long words and exhausted idioms, like a cuttlefish squirting out ink.” (88-9) 

Are you a cuttlefish?

And, predictably, the author admits he has probably committed many of these offenses himself. (89) He is in part, like others, influenced by his environment.

“But if thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought.  A bad usage can spread by tradition and imitation, even among people who should and do know better.” (89)

As he nears the end of the essay, Orwell makes several more writing recommendations and then clearly maps out six rules to follow when logical instinct fails in the writing process:

“(i)  Never use a metaphor, simile or other figure of speech which you are used to seeing in print.

(ii)  Never use a long word where a short one will do.

(iii)  If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out.

(iv)  Never use the passive where you can use the active.

(v)  Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent.

(vi)  Break any of these rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous.

These rules sound elementary, and so they are, but they demand a deep change of attitude in anyone who has grown used to writing in the style  now fashionable.  One could keep all of them and still write bad English, but one could not write the kind of stuff that I quoted in those five specimens at the beginning of this article.” (91-2)

So, how are you doing with your writing?  Well, I certainly have a lot of room for improvement.  In a time where self-publishing is so easy, I think we should make a conscious effort to review and revise what we publish on a regular basis.  Well, at lease I should.  Wish me luck!  And go read Orwell’s essay.

I have been a serious reader for as long as I can remember — at least as long as I’ve been able to read. Before my vocabulary developed enough to read big books, my mother read me the short novels that captured my attention with their titles and covers. I have never, ever been compelled to read a book because of what the inside jacket said about the writer; whether he or she possessed a masters degree or taught English at such and such or wrote for so and so living in fill in the blank, with family and beloved mutt, with their list of bestsellers. None of that tells me about the book in hand. Who doesn’t know a teacher, someone with an advanced degree, someone with a few writing credits to their name, or someone living in the country with kids and a Lab? Credentials don’t tell me why the author wrote the book: the most important detail to put on a cover, in my opinion…

Continue reading (free)…

I’m one of those people that are really terrible at expressing their feelings. In fact, half the time I don’t express them. I am a message in a bottle, if you can pop the cork you’ll be taken into a world of deep emotion.

I’ve always  been a pretty quiet person. It takes me a while to make friends because I’m not good at opening up. I’ve come to realize that to get to know me, the real me, you have to be patient. I think I’m realizing that now. Since coming to Nashville I have made exactly one super close friend that I could spill my emotions out to. I have made many other friends at work that know me, mostly. They don’t know the deep parts of me though. They know I’m married, basically happy with my life, that I have two dogs I love, and that I love reading. That’s pretty much me. However, most of them don’t know about my past, they just know my present. I have a roller coaster of a past, at least I feel that way. Up and down, granted it could be a lot worse.

Recently, I’ve felt this longing to be closer to God. God has then been calling me into fellowship. Something I’ve never been great at. I’ve always had close friends from back home and haven’t had to build something up. Except with Anna, my best friend in Nashville. I feel the reason I became so close to her was because we spent everyday together and really tried to invest in each others lives. Now, I’m having to learn how to invest in the lives of people I only see a couple times a month, or maybe once a week. It is so hard, especially since I’m scared of spilling the whole bottle that is me out at one time. Afraid they might think I’m too much to handle and decide against being my friend. I think God is telling me that my bottle is just like anyone else though. We all have a past. I’ve been reading 1984 by George Orwell. I absolutely love this book by the way. But last night I read a toast that Winston was making. O’Brien asked, “What shall it be this time? To the confusion of the Thought Police? To the death of Big Brother? To humanity? To the future?” Winston said, “To the past.” O’Brien replied to him, “The past is more important.” O’Brien understood what Winston was saying. If we forget the past we forget who we are. So my new thinking on this fellowship thing that God is putting me into is that the past is what connects us all. We all have one, we can’t be sure about our futures, and if we only know each other in the present then we don’t really know each other at all.

At the community group that Blake and I are attending we are all sharing our stories condensed down to 20 minutes so that we can all better understand who we are. I find it very difficult to condense life down but I’ve been working on it. While working on it, I realize that I may never be a social butterfly but if people are willing to listen to my story I may connect with a few that are willing to stick to this journey with me.

And so begins my journey. I’ll be telling it in fragments for those few readers of mine and I will be telling it to my community group in a couple weeks. You’ll probably get more details here though.

There are many obstacles that face an emerging technology. No matter how sound the design the fact remains that only a small number of technological developments are ever fully embraced by the mainstream population. We can all remember technologies, sometimes better than what was adopted, that for one reason or another fell out of favor and into obscurity. The Betamax and HD-DVD’s are two examples of technology that although arguably were the next step in technological evolution, they instead succumb to a rival product.

Today there is a new war taking place on the battlefield of technological evolution. And just like in the past new emerging products are fighting to become the next technological trend. Recently however, products have had to prove themselves not against other rival products but instead against the very people responsible for their creation and distribution. The technology in question that serves to illustrate my point is none other than the Kindle E-Book device. The Kindle is a product that allows its owners to remotely download and read electronic versions of books. Created by Amazon.com in 1997 the original device can be described only as hit selling out almost immediately upon its release. Today however, the company has a very different situation on its hands.

In July of 2009, after a dispute regarding copyright legislation Amazon.com remotely deleted users copies of George Orwell’s 1984 from the Kindle E-Book device. Public reaction to the remote deletion has been expectedly negative. As compensation for their mistake Amazon.com immediately offered a refund of the sale price of the book and later offered a $30 gift card. It soon became apparent however, that this would be unsatisfactory compensation for the invasion of privacy that had occurred.

Almost immediately after the remote deletion public outcry was immense, and this disapproval continued for some time after the initial event. The event was so egregious that it prompted several lawsuits against Amazon.com eventually culminating in a public apology stating that such an act would not take place in the future.

While the apology and refund did much to appease the hard feelings between Amazon.com and customers who had purchased copies of 1984. A greater disservice had been committed against the electronic book technology as a whole. Being a technology in the initial stages of coming into its own it has been forced into a huge step backwards due to the careless actions of its parent company. And while the total cost of the mistake can be calculated in terms of the refund, Amazon.com may never know the sum total loss in future sales of E-Book’s and readers that has come from the recently created public mistrust of the technology.

Indeed many customers who might have been considering purchasing an E-Book reader now feel uncomfortable taking the $300 plunge into this emerging technology. And rightly so, these feelings are not unfounded nor are they unreasonable. After all who would like to purchase a product, any product that may be taken from you with little or no warning? These recently developed hard-feeling between the public and electronic books is made all the greater by the fact that the technology that they are fighting to replace physical books, are thought of as a lasting investment to be enjoyed for many tens or even hundreds of years.

As a result of Amazon.com’s initial thoughtless actions what was once a technological hit set to revolutionize printed media, is currently facing an uncertain future. Most importantly however, is the fact that people may never see E-Books as the solution that they once did. Amazon has initiated a “no more deletions” policy but as I have stated the damage has for the most part been irreversibly done. Therefore this event should serve as a warning to future company’s looking to venture into new emerging technological realms, that marketing and customer service are crucial when dealing with a technology on the verge of becoming mainstream.

o calor insuportável de 5ª não me preparou pro toró de hoje.

ainda quente demais. o ar condensando-se em vapor, globos oculares cozinhando ‘no bafo’, visão falhando.

café e cigarros à tarde, que estávamos convalescendo (não é o plural majestático, pode ter certeza… nenhuma majestade deste lado). descobri que sou alérgico a amendoim. garganta obstruída, dificuldade de engolir.

na última semana li ‘crônicas birmanesas’, do Delisle, que foi o que me fez pegar a cópia do 1984 pra conferir os ensaios. cê sabe que o Eric trabalhou na Birmânia por um tempo, antes de encher o saco e sair pela europa e ficar na pior. rendeu um livro legal, ‘dias na birmânia’. coisas.

a sensação térmica hoje era parecida com a que alguns autores descrevem em países asiáticos aterrorizantes. a chuva morna durou uns 15 minutos e me lembrou das monções.

e de um conto do Bradbury que, se não me engano, a E.C. adaptou pros quadrinhos. um planeta em que chovia perpetuamente. as missões tripuladas contavam com uma base, a única garantia de que não ficariam expostos aos elementos. mas nesse tipo de história as coisas precisam dar errado pra se ter o que contar, certo?

então imagine!

na minha história o coletivo passou e quando cheguei em casa já tinha terminado a chuva. um dos meus olhos ainda parece cozido. meu oftalmologista diria que não é um diagnóstico animador.

depois do último fds em que, mais uma vez, o ombro, acompanhado de perto por um par de vértebras, parece ter saído do lugar, me animei a fazer alguns exercícios e tentar salvar o que resta de funcional na carcaça que estou usando.

a parte engraçada é que funciona.

a desagradável é que não tenho certeza do que fazer quando a temperatura bate nos 42º. não quero arriscar um piripaque irreversível.

Me empieza a cansar bastante la situación en la que vivimos. Siempre que hay un conflicto en el Tercer Mundo hay un interés por parte de un actor occidental, que siempre se enriquece a costa de los más pobres, aumentando el abismo económico existente en el planeta. Llámese Irak, Afganistán o Somalia, por una parte; o bien Shell, Estados Unidos o Ikea, por la otra. Y es que nunca falla. Ya estoy, como digo, bastante cansado. También ando algo decepcionado al comprobar que, definitivamente, el hombre es un lobo para el hombre, algo que se dijo hace ya mucho tiempo pero que nunca había querido creer del todo. Esta es la verdadera razón por la que siempre habrá injusticias y diferentes clases en el mundo, nos guste o no.

Y cómo no, la situación de Somalia, carente de soberanía, ha sido aprovechada por los de siempre. En este caso, los dedos apuntan a Londres. Y es que al parecer, según apunta la web de la Cadena Ser, “un informe de la inteligencia militar europea de la misión Atalanta alerta de que los piratas no escogen sus víctimas al azar“. Y continúa, “aunque los piratas que perpetran los ataques son sólo simples ejecutores, dicen los informes, los jefes locales de las redes piratas están en permanente comunicación con sus asesores en Londres mediante teléfono satélite, y es precisamente en Londres, donde estos clanes piratas poseen una estructura de informadores bien situados que les permite elegir los objetivos antes de que sus lanchas se hagan a la mar”. Lo que viene a decir que no es casualidad que la mayoría de los ataques se realicen a barcos de países más débiles militarmente, entre los que se incluyen barcos españoles.

Otra de las afirmaciones recogidas en el informe es que “los piratas evitan atacar a los barcos de determinadas banderas“. Así, se señala como especialmente evidente el caso de los barcos británicos, que a pesar de ser una de las marinas mercantes más numerosa en esa zona, apenas ha sufrido ataques en el último año.

Un artículo de Rafael Ramos, corresponsal en Londres de La Vanguardia, y titulado Bucaneros del siglo XXI (segunda parte) habla así de la trama con epicentro en la capital británica.

Londres, como capital del mayor imperio mercantil de la historia donde tienen su sede muchas compañías navieras y aseguradoras (entre ellas el gigante Lloyds), es el epicentro de todas las actividades que se realizan bajo cuerda desde que los piratas capturan un navío –ya sea el petrolero Sirius Star o el pesquero español Playa de Bakio- hasta el pago de la cantidad acordada como rescate, un proceso lento y complejo que por término medio lleva seis meses, mientras una parte y otra regatean como en un zoco árabe pero a través del ordenador y el teléfono.

Otra web, Redjusticiafiscal.org, se pregunta “por qué unos hechos producidos en el cuerno de Africa se resuelven mediante transferencias bancarias desde la ciudad londinense”, y relaciona la trama con la red internacional de blanqueo de capitales y paraísos fiscales.

Pero no sólo la prensa española habla en estos términos. Esta información concuerda con la ofrecida por el Daily Telegraph el 9 de mayo de 2009, en una noticia titulada “Piratas somalíes ayudados por los servicios de inteligencia londinenses” y por otra ofrecida por The Guardian correspondiente al 11 de mayo, titulada “Esto es Londres – la capital del servicio secreto de operaciones de los piratas somalíes”

Acotemos aún más las acusaciones. La empresa londinense Hart Security, especializada en entrenar a mercenarios para conflictos armados, tiene mucho que decir. Según diversas informaciones, esta compañía se encargó de preparar a los Guardacostas Voluntarios Nacionales, entrenados en un principio para mantener alejados del mar territorial somalí a los buitres occidentales deseosos de carroña y que, como era de esperar en uno de los países más pobres del mundo, pasaron a ser cazarrecompensas. La compañía cobró dinero para preparar a los voluntarios, y actualmente se lleva parte de lo que los piratas obtienen de sus secuestros, ya que también actúa como intermediaria con los diferentes gobiernos afectados. Según apunta Hernan Zin en su interesantísimo blog de 20 Minutos, la comisión ronda el medio millón de euros.

Por otro lado, los estados y las empresas atuneras han empezado a contratar a compañías que “adiestren” a los miembros de la seguridad privada que llevarán sus barcos, lo que beneficia directamente a empresas como Hart Security, especializadas en el sector. Como bien dice el blog de Pikajoso “esto es el negocio redondo. Te lucras creando un futuro problema y otra vez te lucras participando en la solución”. Y es que hasta por tres vías distintas puede llegar a recibir dinero la compañía.

De hecho, tal como apunta Web.iespana.es, “Hart Security UK  ha reportado un incremento del cuádruple en sus beneficios desde que comenzó a ofrecer el servicio de entrenamiento a los vigilantes privados en octubre”. El propio director de la compañía lo explica de la siguiente manera: “Cuando la firma comenzó ofrecer guardias armados en octubre, estaba realizando unos cinco viajes escoltados mensuales por el Golfo de Adén. Ahora realiza unos 20 de esos viajes cada mes y ofrece además los servicios de dos barcos con helicópteros y capacidad de 28 personas cada uno. Usualmente son contratados por grupos de barcos para actuar como escoltas, y están en uso todas las semanas”.

Es curioso comprobar cómo una compañía que se hace llamar “de seguridad” adiestra a la gente para hacer la guerra y extender el terror en la población a cambio de dinero. Esta situación me recuerda un tanto al Big Brother de Orwell, en el que el Ministerio encargado de los asuntos relacionados con la guerra se hacía llamar “de la Paz”, o al FMI, cuya misión dícese que es la de romper la barrera que separa a los países del Tercer Mundo de los países occidentales, cuando lo que realmente hace es cobrar abusivos intereses por sus préstamos. Que dios nos coja confesados el día que la situación reviente.

Read humor. Not this. And other sentence fragments @ www.jeffreypillow.com

Three bullet points.

• For the past few weeks I’ve been growing Charlottesville’s worst beard. Today, I decided instead to grow Charlottesville’s worst mustache so I shaved my cheeks, chin, and neck. My face can no longer be confused with my butt cheeks. Ghost of Dale Earnhardt eat your heart out.
• Last night, I watched No Country for Old Men for the first time. As a relatively huge fan of Cormac McCarthy, (I am 6′4″ after all), I had refused for the longest time to watch the movie before I read the book. Unfortunately, God said that contrary to my prayer he cannot add any more hours to the day. My internal narrator, Jason, pleaded with Him. To no avail, however. Thus, I gave up and decided to go ahead and watch the movie. At the rate I was going, I wouldn’t see the film for another year. I’m currently reading 1984 by George Orwell. Awesome book. Winston Smith better bash someone’s head in with a brick before the end of the novel or my hopes as a reader will be dashed, the conclusion not crowned as it should. No Country for Old Men, the film, superb. Wasn’t pissed by the ending. Felt it was perfect. Has moved into my Top 10. White Men Can’t Jump still holds #1 spot followed by One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest and No Way Out (year: 1950, starring Sidney Poitier. NOT the Kevin Costner/Gene Hackman flick of the same name. Shit no.), plus six others.
• Back to the mustache. After shaving the ass hair off my face, I found this humorous video on YouTube:

“La realidad existe en la mente humana y en ningún otro sitio. No en la mente individual, que puede cometer errores y que, en todo caso, perece pronto. Sólo la mente del Partido, que es colectiva e inmortal, puede captar la realidad. Lo que el Partido sostiene que es verdad es efectivamente verdad. Es imposible ver la realidad sino a través de los ojos del Partido. Este es el hecho que tienes que aprender, Winston. Para ello se necesita un acto de autodestrucción, un esfuerzo de la voluntad. Tienes que humillarte si quieres volverte cuerdo”.

1984, de George Orwell.

Si sustituimos la palabra “Partido” por “medios de comunicación” y releemos el texto, nos daremos cuenta de que no estaba tan equivocado Orwell cuando predijo la dictadura que asolaría a la sociedad de finales del siglo XX, principios del XXI. Hoy día todo lo que sabemos y todo lo que no sabemos sobre el mundo se lo debemos exclusivamente a los medios. A veces, eso sí, tenemos que resignarnos ante lo mucho que desconocemos por informaciones sesgadas, parciales o manipuladas, o por la falta de cobertura de asuntos “que carecen de interés” para el Partido los propios medios. Es entonces cuando tienes que humillarte para no volverte loco a base de preguntas que jamás podremos responder por nosotros mismos.

Y es que, como diría O’Brien, “nada hay al margen del Partido”. Ni siquiera los blogueros, que viven -vivimos-, inmersos en redes sociales de grandes compañías comunicativas, y que basamos el 99% de nuestras propias entradas -que creemos al margen de los medios convencionales- hablando de lo que dice la propia prensa.

Pero da igual. Dedica tu vida a comprar, vivir y salir, para así ser tan feliz como la gente que aparece en los anuncios de la tele, y deja que otros digan por ti cuáles son los temas que deben interesarte y la forma en la que te la deben contar.