On News, Stupidity, and American Democracy

...[T]he media's all-consuming interest in the "how" and "who's ahead" of politics, and "oh God this is boring" disdain for the "what" and "why" of public issues, has all sorts of ugly consequences. It makes the public think that politics is not for them unless they love the insider game; it makes the "what" and "why" of public issues indeed boring and unapproachable; and as a consequence of the latter, it makes the public stupider than it needs to be about the what and why.

James Fallows wrote that, in a blog post about Al Gore's recent Rolling Stone essay, the news story it became, and why we hate the media.

Having lived in China, and especially now that I've started preparing to (yikes) write about China, conversations about "communism" and "freedom" and "democracy" are impossible for me to avoid. And, while the CCP its wasteful paranoia frustrate me, I think it's important to for Americans to take note of observations like Fallows's and remember just how imperfect (and thus understandably unappealing overseas) our democracy is.

Another Reason to Love China

Please click this link.

It's an article about two pounds of very old marijuana.  Two pounds of very old marijuana found in a tomb in the desert in China.

My favorite quote is from the caption next to a picture of a rubber-gloved scientist tweezing a bit of the weed into a container for him to bring home and "test" over the weekend:

Scientists are unsure if the marijuana was grown for more spiritual or medical purposes, but it's evident that the man was buried with a lot of it.

I only smoked the greens in China a couple of times.  It was not locally sourced.  It was American.  A friend smuggled it back from a medical marijuana farm in Mendocino County, CA. 

And there is a very serious story behind it.  One that involves a lawyer, outsourcing the manufacture of clipping and gardening tools to a factory in Shenzhen, political dilemmas, cash in buried mason jars, socially responsible investors, and a SWAT team. 

It's probably best told when everyone listening is stoned.

Election Day in Montana

It still freaks me out that people in this country are afraid to vote for vegetarians .

Roy Brown ended up losing his election by more than 30 percentage points, so, most likely, he wouldn't have had a chance even if he was a velociraptor.*  His convincing victory in Sweet Grass County, however, was quite incriminating.

*Note: What's the opposite of a vegetarian?  A cannibal?

As She Bounces Through the Blue Sky

I'm going to sleep on the eve of the election, and I feel like I ought to post a little Ween.

Maybe it's because I think my nerves medicine worked for the Phillies.

Maybe it's because my cousin Zach rolled down from NY today, and we discussed the fact that we expect our next Ween-inspired adventure to be even sillier than the last.

Maybe it's because, as a recent email just alerted me, my "mind has finally evolved into a child's circus land full of poop songs."

Regardless, Blue Balloon is track 2 on La Cucaracha, and I love it.

(download)

The Opportunity

I sent this note to my cousin the other day.  Because he's undecided.  Because he's 22.  Because he's creative.  Because he's fundamentally kind and generous and thoughtful.  And because I love him and want him to share my excitement...

I don't like the idea of voting for an old man.  Not unless his eyes sparkle with youthful ideas. 

I want to vote for love and generosity and curiosity and open mindedness.  The stuff of the young and inspired.

Battlescars aren't wisdom unless they teach change.  Attachment to the status quo is despair.  Yearning for a happier yesterday is helplessness.  Conservatism is admitting that we can't be any better than what we are now or what we were then.

And, even if that is true - if there are limits, and we've hit them - I say we bite, smash, and hammer away at them anyway.  Because it's more fun to hope than to hoard and hide and isolate.

Because if we can't do with a smile on our face, if we can't do it with love in our heart, then, children, we ain't got no right to do it at all. 

We're supposed to be some kind of different.

And I think there's a chance that Barack Obama is some kind of different

The More Perfect Union speech was beautiful.  The tire gauges were, silly as they sounded, quite possibly the most reasonable energy policy idea the US government has had in long time.  The man is cool under pressure.  He's thoughtful and knowledgeable.  He's curious.  His wife is a superstar: absolutely rightfully unsatisfied with this country and working to make it better.

Warren Buffet and Colin Powell and Fred Wilson and Marc Andreessen and Eric Schmidt and James Fallows and Oprah all believe in him.  Smart people.  Reasonable people.  Innovative people.

So we'll see.

If Obama's not different, if he's nothing but an actor, bummer.  But we'll move on.  We'll save the world despite the US government.  We'll clean up its mess.  Tirelessly.  We'll make it irrelevant.  We'll do all its work for it.  With philanthropy.  With sustainable business.  With literature.  With poetry.  With simple acts of kindness and love.

And without fear.

But that doesn't mean we shouldn't vote.  It doesn't mean we shouldn't hope.  It doesn't mean we shouldn't take this opportunity to support the candidate that inspires musical genius.

Peace.  Love.

On Symbols and Populists

The More Perfect Union speech in Philadelphia was a beautiful thing, but I think this is the Campaign 2008 moment that'll stick with me longest.

I'll remember it for two reasons.

A. I think it's important to keep in mind that inflated tires would have just as much oil import relief impact as expanded drilling.  Neither would do much, but nor would either be entirely trivial.  And the fact that something simple and inexpensive and habitual like tire inflation can be non-trivial is very cool.  But the big lesson, I think, is that the people our political system tends to choose to lead our government are not well equipped to deal with huge, long term problems like the fact that the world economy depends heavily on a scarce fuel that both earns big money for dangerous people and the use of which does terrifying damage to the natural systems on which we depend for food and breath and wonder.  They debate largely symbolic issues like tire gauges vs. Alaskan drilling, not big fundamental energy questions, and they do it because we make our decisions based on those symbolic issues, and that's a bummer. 

B. A lot of people in this country do take pride in being ignorant, and that's both dangerous and sad.  Seeing Obama call them out, however, is hopeful.  If our leaders are going to participate in solving those huge, long term problems, they'll have to be more than just populist mouthpieces.  They'll have to be better than the rest of us: calm in crisis, selfless, and open to radical new ideas.  Condemning the anti-intellectual (anti-knowledge, anti-learning, anti-curiosity) attitude is a good step.

Governments, Skepticism, and Campaign 2008

How important is this upcoming presidential election?

How important, in the big picture, is the President of the United States?

How important is the United States government?

How important are governments in general?

We know they can be important in negative ways.  They can be violent and oppressive.  They can use political power to destroy.

And we know they can be important as problem solving facilitators, as conduits for the will of the people.  Governments that cooperate with the private and philanthropic sectors and enable social movements and technological advances are certainly preferable to governments that stifle grassroots innovation through ideological stubbornness and/or bureaucratic tangle.

But can governments create?  Can they introduce positive change?  Can they identify misguided or unproductive cultural tendencies and steer their people in more virtuous directions?  And, if they can, what are some examples?  And what were the political, economic, and war and peace conditions under which those changes were made?

One reason I ask these questions is that I'm feeling skeptical, and skepticism isn't far from cynicism, which isn't far from pessimism, and I don't want any part of any of that

I have a tendency to doubt government creativity.  Politicians in democracies seem far too concerned with re-election to ever meaningfully call their culture to task, and, similarly, authoritarian leaders seem far more focused on preserving their authoritarian perches than building better societies.  But I wonder if I'm missing something, forgetting some inspiring historical moment, and I'm hoping that writing about this and hearing what other people think will help me angle my skepticism in a productive direction.

Another reason I ask is that I think it's important to ask.  If governments have been positive creative forces, we ought to consider the circumstances under which that was possible and seek to re-create them.

And another reason is that I'm conflicted about the extent to which I should try to involve myself in this upcoming election.  I mean I'll certainly vote.  I read.  I watch Saturday Night Live reenactments.  And I share how I feel politically, explain myself, and try to find points of agreement and understanding with everyone I can.

But I'm wondering if I should be doing more.  And that, to a certain extent anyway, depends on whether I believe a President Barack Obama will have creative power. 

If, as president, by nature of that position, he'll be little but an extension of the American people's collective desire for cheap energy and easy access to money we haven't yet earned, then I think I ought to focus all my time and energy elsewhere. 

But if he really is, underneath the ugly election season layer of political ridiculousness, an exceptionally thoughtful and motivated problem solver, and the constraints of government and politics won't prevent him from using his charm and lawmaking creativity to start extracting the poison of instant gratification economics* out of our culture, then maybe I need to figure out how I can help the man get elected.

I doubt I could be all that meaningfully helpful.  And I'm not sure if I wouldn't be more helpful to the grand cosmic effort if I just kept as tight a focus as possible on The Carrot Project.  But if this next month really is a potentially defining moment for the future of the world, then I think it'd be irresponsible not to do something.

*Note: In my opinion, one of the core problems the world faces is the fundamental difficulty we all have in considering the long term impacts of our desire for short term gain.  I've referred to it in the past as
hit and run economics, a metaphor born on this blog, with partially celebratory reference, somewhat ironically, to Senator McCain's economic and environmental platform.  It's the way of thinking that put us in this financial mess.  It's the way of thinking that's causing climate change.  It's the way of thinking that starts crazy wars.  And it's a way of thinking with which The Carrot Project will always be battling.

The Bloomberg Factor

I just read that NYC Mayor Mike Bloomberg endorsed a Democrat in the election for the Staten Island seat in the US House of Representatives.

It made me wonder if Bloomberg plans to back McCain or Obama for president.

That thought made me wonder if he has already decided to back one or the other, and I just don't know about it yet.

I asked Google, and they sent me to a Huffington Post article, and it told me that the Green Party, "without the mayor's knowledge or consent," gathered enough signatures to put Bloomberg on the presidential ballot in Virginia, with Ron Paul as his VP.

I guess the implication there is that he hasn't done any endorsing.

But now I wonder if his inclusion on the Virginia ballot matters.  Will he take a substantial amount of votes from one of the candidates?  Which one? 

And what if he did endorse someone, how much would it help?

But, now, after spending a few minutes writing this, I'm thinking about the recent Wall St insanity and wondering if we ought to dress Bloomberg in a Superman costume and send him around, bank to bank, treasury office to treasury office, trying to save the financial sector. 

I actually have no idea if Bloomberg is any good at anything, but a lot of people love him, and I bet a lot of people would get pretty excited to see him flying around, cape flapping in the wind, fighting irresponsible investing.