An easy city to hate, perhaps. But there's something about L.A. that keeps me coming back. And back. At The Atlantic, Conor Friedersdorf rises to the defense against Bernard Henri Levy's very old world attack on the City of Angels. A representative gripe:

[...] what must be true for a city to be legible?

First, it has to have a center. But Los Angeles has no center. It has districts, neighborhoods, even cities within the city, each of which has a center of some sort. But one center, one unique site as a point of reference for that law of isonomy the Athenians believed was the principle behind every city, a hub or focus with which the inhabitants of Beverly Hills, Hollywood, Venice, Chinatown, Koreatown, Little Saigon and Little Tokyo, Malibu, Inglewood, Pico Union (and I could go on, since Los Angeles officially numbers eighty-four neighborhoods, where 120 languages are spoken), could have a relationship at once distinct and regular--nothing like that exists in Los Angeles.

There's a whiff, in that polemic, of what Peter Lawler, over at Postmodern Conservative, is fond of calling polis envy.

Remember this?

Things being as they are, and people as they are, there is no way to prevent somebody, somewhere, from concluding that "NATIONAL REVIEW favors drugs.'' We don't; we deplore their use; we urge the stiffest feasible sentences against anyone convicted of selling a drug to a minor. But that said, it is our judgment that the war on drugs has failed, that it is diverting intelligent energy away from how to deal with the problem of addiction, that it is wasting our resources, and that it is encouraging civil, judicial, and penal procedures associated with police states. We all agree on movement toward legalization, even though we may differ on just how far.

It was WFB himself who opined, in the symposium that followed the above announcement,

that it is outrageous to live in a society whose laws tolerate sending young people to life in prison because they grew, or distributed, a dozen ounces of marijuana. I would hope that the good offices of your vital profession would mobilize at least to protest such excesses of wartime zeal, the legal equivalent of a My Lai massacre. And perhaps proceed to recommend the legalization of the sale of most drugs, except to minors.

In a tart, potent update of his long attack on the drug war, Radley Balko brought it all rushing back to me with a grim bottom line:

As I explained in a column a couple weeks ago, this wasn't a "botched raid." It was a routine raid. The police got the correct house. They found the guy they were after. They arrested him. No one was killed. Most of these raids don't turn up huge stashes of drugs or weapons. Most result in misdemeanor charges. If Krauthammer finds the Missouri SWAT raid video "harrowing and horrible," he ought to find the drug war "harrowing and horrible." Because the images in that video are typical of how we're fighting it.

I'm in favor of the rule of law. But the way we're struggling to enforce our present drug laws has begun to work against the purposes of the rule of law itself. If National Review could point to a way beyond this dilemma in 1996, couldn't -- and shouldn't -- we make the effort to do so again today?

Air Force One on the tarmac at SFO right now. Must be a fundraiser someplace tonight. Either that or a big oil spill in the Pacific that I've yet to hear about.

AF1

Apologies for the low-res photo, but I forgot my memory card reader so had to resort to the crummy camera on my mighty BlackBerry.

James Poulos
May 21, 2010 at 6:45pm
bastille

That's what Simon Schama sees coming:

Objectively, economic conditions might be improving, but perceptions are everything and a breathing space gives room for a dangerously alienated public to take stock of the brutal interruption of their rising expectations. What happened to the march of income, the acquisition of property, the truism that the next generation will live better than the last? The full impact of the overthrow of these assumptions sinks in and engenders a sense of grievance that “Someone Else” must have engineered the common misfortune.

Yes, sometimes it's what Schama says it is -- a mere sense of grievance, as opposed to the real thing. But America's tea-party uptick in popular politics can't be explained away by reference to our grievance culture. Schama implies what Mark Lilla just made explicit in the New York Review of Books -- that populist activism today is neo-Jacobin. Pre-revolutionary France simmered in a toxic mix of real tyranny and what Tocqueville called 'literary politics' -- an approach so unreal in its unreason, abstraction, and utopianism that all attempts to realize it in the flesh and blood world of human affairs issued forth merely in the blood of the Terror. Despite the impact of 'literary politics' on the tenor of today's public life, our "common misfortune" is hardly a fever dream. Christopher Lasch rightly warned that upward mobility can grow cultish. But it's hardly a doctrine dissevered from reality.

Rather than a fever dream, it's the American Dream that's reorienting people to the possibilities of active citizenship (That's something a fairminded fan of Lasch ought to commend; the American Dream isn't simply the marketing campaign for the cult of upward mobility.) Hunter S. Thompson pronounced the American Dream dead two whole election cycles before Lasch became the inspiration for Carter's 'malaise' speech. But as wrong a track as we're on today, 2009 is no 1979. That doesn't mean the populist dyspepsia of today is a self-indulgent fantasy. It means many of us want to change course now before we sail into a new malaise. No matter how heated or attenuated the rhetoric can get in democratic life, the peril and the promise powering tea party populism are rooted in reality. Downplaying that fact can lead to other fever dreams -- like Schama's strange vision of "head tutor" Barack Obama, "a warrior of the word every bit as combative as the army of the righteous that believes it has the constitution on its side[.]" One gets the feeling Schama is against all literary politics except his own.

Over at Contentions, John Podhoretz has written a very kind welcome to Ricochet. I'm a huge fan of his, and of what he's created over there.

I know a lot of people will be outraged by The New York Times' revelation today that the United States is expanding its clandestine military activity to disrupt militant groups in Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Somalia. But I say all the outrage is misplaced. If you read the article closely, you'll see that they've revealed nothing that isn't absolutely obvious. I mean, if we're not doing that, someone should be fired, yesterday. In fact, that has to be one of the top-ten most boring leaks of secret military information I've ever read.

I was a lot more surprised by the Souping up Spring Vegetables article. Did you all know that soup's not just a winter food? Bravo to the Times for publishing that weird recipe involving asparagus, green garlic and eggs. All too easy to dismiss the sound of that one as simultaneously effete and nasty, so give them credit for bravery. It can't have been an easy call in the newsroom.

I must admit, that article really challenged a lot of my assumptions about soup.

Phil Lebherz
May 24, 2010 at 7:59pm

Hi All, let's get down to business. We had Carly Fiorina over to our house the other day. We spoke for over an hour. She seems like a reasonable choice for Ca. Senator. We have to get rid of Barbara Boxer. Carly took the lead in the polls recently, what do you think?

...in this case, it's on to something. Sort of, but worth thinking about. Virginia Heffernan, who it's been scientifically proven is wrong about everything, is wrong about what she frets about in the Times today, in her article "The Death of the Open Web," which is a typical piece of NYT silliness.

She's worried that with more stuff going behind a paywall -- a lot of News Corp's titles, for instance -- and she frets about the app universe, especially Apple's, for its restrictions and censorship and general all-around supervised play.

Neglecting, naturally for a New York Times writer, the giant, floating, pulsating reality in front of her. YouTube, Facebook, Twitter -- all open, WIDE open, all growing at an amazing clip. YouTube, for those who don't know, is the second-largest search engine in the world. In addition to being a wide-open platform for video. In addition to changing the entire media landscape for ever -- by creating an open, democratic, chaotic video marketplace.

How's that for open? Yes, Virginia, there are apps. And news sites behind a paywall. But that's hardly the trend.

On the other hand, she's right that the chaos and craziness of the web has encouraged people to think about ways to tame it, a bit. To create great experiences for people who want them.

I think what we're doing at Ricochet is sort of an interesting blend -- we want everyone, anyone, to be able to read our content. But in order to create a more civilized, readable, less-swampy and more enjoyable conversational experience, we're asking people who want to participate to become members, to pay a (small) monthly fee.

Which I'm sure is something Virginia Heffernan will worry about.

Dave Carter
May 24, 2010 at 8:03pm

Sitting in a quaint mom and pop truck stop in I-dunno-the-name-of-this-town, IL, I felt bad about not eating well last night and so assuaged my guilt tonight with hot apple pie and ice cream. After some thought, I remembered which state I slept in last night, but I couldn't tell you about the previous nights. That's one of oddities of this line of work; the days become a blur of activity where places and faces merge together in a constant stream. Averaging around 2,700 miles per week, certain events are etched in my memory, but I can't always tell you where they happened. I've awakened in the morning and been unsure of which state I'm in, other than the state of confusion, I mean.

But even in that fog of highways, cities, country side, I know one thing for certain. I know that I did not serve in Vietnam, which sends any political aspirations I might have had in Connecticut down in flames. In fact, looking at the headlines today (the President's approval numbers tanking even as Gov Deval Patrick says that those who disagree with Obama are coming close to sedition, while Patrick Kennedy says that Arizona's attempt to secure its own border violates the spirit of the Constitution), suddenly my own confusion seems minor. In fact, compared with the general confusion many of our politicians display, even Chicago traffic makes sense! Back to the apple pie...

southafricaworldcup

Wearying news making the rounds about the 2010 World Cup:

Zuma himself has announced that he is bringing his three wives and his fiancée, while ex-presidents Mandela, Mbeki and their partners are expected to attend and to be placed next to the presidents of Mexico and Fifa.

What’s more, at the last African Union summit Zuma declared that this was not South Africa’s World Cup but Africa’s and that all African heads of state were welcome. It now emerges that 50 out of 52 are said to be coming plus their considerable retinues. Sudan’s president, Omar al-Bashir, may be among them, although there is a warrant out for his arrest from the International Criminal Court, and legally South Africa would be compelled to detain him. Another difficult case will be Robert Mugabe, since Biden and many others will wish to avoid having to meet the Zimbabwean president or shake his hand.

Huge numbers of cabinet members from across Africa also want to attend the junket. There will clearly not be room in the VVIP area or even the VIP area for all these VIPs and their extensive entourages. [...] On top of this Winnie Mandela is loudly demanding 25 VVIP tickets for herself and her entourage. Rich Mkhondo, a spokesman for the LOC admitted: ‘There is a huge demand for VVIP and VIP tickets for the opening and closing (ceremonies) but I cannot confirm the seating arrangements.’

The red carpet treatment for polyamorous "partners" is particularly suggestive of a new level of corruption headed our way, one which governments will find themselves unwilling to suppress, and which the biggest and best corporations will tacitly, and then more than tacitly, support.

But not, for now, in France! -- where, as with burqa banning, the best of western morality and mores tend to be upheld by the worst of western fiat and decree.

By way of an introduction to the rest of Ricochet's intrepid contributors, I'd like to share my delight with the LA Times. It always lightens my day. It took but three short minutes to get a couple of laughs on this dreary Monday morn.

I hooted with when I saw a below-the-fold 10 paragraph story that "Survivor" producer and chief suspect in his wife's murder, Bruce Beresford-Redman, has just waltzed right back into his comfy LA lifestyle. No problems at the border for him....even after they took his passport. See, we don't stop anyone illegally leaving Mexico, even those polluting our society with reality TV. And how about that pathetically incompetetent Mexican justice system? All this after the Times lauded Mexican President Felipe Calderon for lambasting the U.S. to the standing ovation of congressional Dems.

But the big laugh of the morning was the photo next to it...a protest in Santa Monica against lifting a whaling ban. I'm not necessarily supporting ending the ban if these species of whales are endangered...but what made me chuckle was in the background is a "whale hugger" holding a sign: "Obama Save the Whales." Heal me Jesus.

b

An interesting graph, presented today at Google's I/O conference. Sure it's a little vague, but it's pretty clear what direction media are going in.

On the far left (and yes, I get the irony) radio audiences are eroding. On the far right, internet use is exploding. In the middle, everything else.

Andrew Klavan
May 24, 2010 at 2:12pm

I've spent the entire morning congratulating myself on not having watched Lost. Does that make me shallow? (If not, how can I become shallow?) I stopped watching after the first six episodes when it became clear to me (as a certified professional maker-up of things) that the conclusion could only be 1) it was all a dream or 2) everyone was dead. The only thing that would have redeemed it is if the entire cast had awakened in bed with Bob Newhart.

What? Oh. Wait, wrong tweetering....

James Poulos
May 24, 2010 at 8:43pm

Yes: the new New Pornographers single "Crash Years." Dreary band name, but there's a sweet and subtle hook in the chorus, an Americana twist on the Wilco-ish alt-pop of Belgian band dEUS at its best (1999's The Ideal Crash). Quite a step away from the jittery, yippy clip of earlier songs like "Twin Cinema," but this soft parade ain't no soft rock.

No: the Great New Sound of '10, Treats by Sleigh Bells. Cute voice? Check. Advanced minimalist guitar heroics? Check. Trendiest hip hop beats, seemingly effortlessly appropriated and repackaged for ultra-indie eardrums? Check. So what's the problem? There's everything to like, but nothing to love. Like certain pieces of conceptual art, one glance is all it takes to 'get it'. After that, there's nothing to get.

Dinner at our place. Kinda blah. Kinda nutritious. I wish I was the type to whip up Sunday roasts, but, alas.

Dinner

... I'm supposed to open a conversation about something conservative here, then wait for our hungry acolytes to reply. Is that right?

Ursula Hennessey
May 24, 2010 at 1:42pm

Ah, heaven for New York Post readers like myself: a budding Kennedy scandal, a true-blue royal one, and the French Open.

We're all familiar with the decline in quality, relative to market choices, associated with government-supplied goods and services. But who could have predicted this?

High school students and college-age adults have been complaining to District officials that the free condoms the city has been offering are not of good enough quality and are too small and that getting them from school nurses is "just like asking grandma or auntie."

So D.C. officials have decided to stock up on Trojan condoms, including the company's super-size Magnum variety, and they have begun to authorize teachers or counselors, preferably male, to distribute condoms to students if the teachers complete a 30-minute online training course called "WrapMC" -- for Master of Condoms. [...]

"We thought making condoms available was a good thing, but we never asked the kids what they wanted," said D.C. Council member David A. Catania (I-At Large), chairman of the health committee.

Well, I could have predicted it. And nearly did! "Statism, yes, but with the state as cool parent."

Yes, says Nick Carr, in a forthcoming book. Russell Arben Fox has deep thoughts:

we become habituated to viewing all information — literature, science, journalism, scholarship, whatever — as something to be "strip-mined [for] relevant content" (p. 164), and rather than thereby supposedly refining our ability to recognize (in classic marketplace of ideas fashion) good information from bad, in fact our capacity to make learned judgments is physically undermined.

From time to time, I too want to throw the book at the internet (so to speak). Yet "strip-mining content" reminds me of nothing so much as the strategy of "gutting books" -- a venerable act of analog violence -- that a graduate student must adopt in order to finish in less than 10 years. Of course, a whole country of people who think and read like graduate students would be a dystopia unlike any other. But when it comes to the uses and abuses of crafted knowledge, some things never change.

Hat tip: the one and only Alan Jacobs.

Dave Carter
May 20, 2010 at 3:25pm
Next Table Over

Some of the customers in truck stops are a bit more surly than others. This one was next to my table in Missouri.

Loading

Welcome Visitor

Already a Member?
Please Sign In

Become a Member to enjoy the full benefits of Ricochet:

Join Ricochet today!

Already a Member? Sign In