[Not-so] Love Lockdown, Prologue (1/4): Do Convicted Criminals dream the American dream?

Do convicted criminals dream the American dream?

Sure they do - Just look at freshly sentenced criminals Rajat Gupta (former Goldman board member), R. Allen Stanford (sentenced to 110 years in prison without parole), and of course Grandaddy Ponzi himself, Bernie Madoff. Hell, these guys even lived the American dream, with its fast cars, deep pockets, luxury yachts and diamonds for the ladies in life.

Now, these riches-to-rags storybook characters are scheduled to rot in a Federal penitentiary for the rest of their lives, leaving exponentially more finances and possibly life plans ruined in their wake. All this justice, of course, conducted in order to dissuade other current or would-be criminals from acting...in exactly the only way they know of how to get to the American dream - Get Rich or Die/Go to Jail Trying.

50 Cent was on to something

A rather paradoxical message, given the global rash of government-bank bailouts and the continued reliance on the instruments (i.e. financial markets) of who-dares-wins capitalism. But enough of this suddenly-fashionable bashing of fallen financial idols. It seems like just yesterday when activist judges, juries, and members of the media started defending the rights of convicted rapists, murderers, gang-bangers and the assorted denizens of American death row - new and vindicating/damning DNA evidence notwithstanding - so I'm sure public opinion will grow weary of its latest social witch-hunt sooner or later, and that District Attorneys/Federal Prosecutors will likewise find some other scapegoats upon which to build their reputations on the docket. Sooner or later, our generation's To Kill a Mockingbird of the early 21st century will be published, this time admonishing the veritable inquisition of financial criminals during a time of long-term recession and entrenched unemployment.

Yet even in a time of economic downturn, when Wall Street becomes an easy target of Main Street's wrath, no one seems to be pissing on how the wildly-popular (and mostly plastic) Kardashians, the train-wreck-of-an-excuse-for-a-man Charlie Sheens, or the well-paid, drug-snorting Lindsay Blohan-type celebrities don't pay "their fair share" of American taxes. Plus Justin Bieber- he's CANADIAN!! Where is that money going??

oh...nevermind.

What compelled me to finally write original content for the blog again - and a three-part series, at that - was a combination of many factors, the premier of which was my roommate's comment that, "no offense, but I think the American Dream is more of a Dream than a Reality."

Hump de Bump: Wednesday Links After the Jump

As we hurtle into the middle of the week, it's time for another morning update - this one, Politico-themed:

- President Obama made a "surprise visit" to troops and Afghan leadership yesterday in Kabul, pledging to abide by existing plans for a full withdrawal of U.S. troops in Afghanistan by 2014. NATO troops will stay in the country for at least a decade after 2014, ensuring that some U.S. presence in the region will remain [Politico; CNN].

- Ric Grenell, Foreign Policy spokesman for Mitt Romney's campaign, has resigned over "personal issues"

- Think you've seen it all before? Think again: Congress is getting even more bipartisan and split along the "core ideologies" of both parties. But does this necessarily preclude passing critical legislation?

Speaking of seen it all...Anyone familiar with The Burning Man festival?



one of the tamer images that come up in a search. He will be burning.


We've been speaking of anarchy for the past day, and The Burning Man is like the anarchist's Mecca - "radical inclusion," "decommodification," "radical self-expression" are the order of the day, but now the festival's organizers and lobbyists have descended upon the Capitol (as in D.C., not Hunger Games) to promote the event. The festival has been placed on probation this year by the Bureau of Land Management for exceeding its 53,000 capacity limit, but hopes to expand to 70,000 in the future.

The festival has captured the imagination of popular culture along with the likes of DayGlow, Warped Tour, Coachella et. al., but still retains its original indie vibe and distinctive character. In fact, long-time "burners" would probably regurgitate at my comparison of TBM with the aforementioned festivals.

- New York Times readership up, Washington Post not so lucky - although at less than a million online subscribers, the NYT can hardly be compared with the dedicated userbases of the social networking giants. I wonder how much the "Social Reader" app can help or harm the struggling journalism industry in general?

- Politico's Roger Simon: Stay outraged at the Supreme Court's (SCOTUS) blatant partisanship

- And finally, more of our favorite Secretary of State: Hillary sends rejection letter to Jason Segal

</3

OWS: Socialist Anarchy, or Anarchistic Socialism?

RE: Socialism and the state of the Occupy Wall Street movement as of May Day [WaPo], it strikes me (no pun intended) as extremely ironic that the "anti-institutional" core beliefs of a movement, which invokes "V for Vendetta" and Guy Fawkes-inspired images of anarchy at every turn, would suddenly throw its weight behind a socialist message - the most naturally institutional cause of all, as an artificially-induced redistribution of capital. Indeed, besides the effects of winter and getting kicked out of protest spaces by law enforcement, OWS failed to capitalize on any meaningful policy gains despite international media attention because it lacked centralized leadership or central figures around which the movement could coordinate and focus its impact.

http://boston1775.blogspot.com/2011/11/new-political-meaning-for-guy-fawkess.html

The idea of no centralized leadership and the destruction of institutions is so fundamental to anarchy that it stands in complete conflict with any idea of an institutionalized social compact between the state and its people, and history shows that the possibility of an alliance between anarchism and socialism is logically impossible. Yet as Stephen has already alluded in his morning update, political socialism is once again on the march around the world and in the United States, even if many social welfare policies are precisely what have bankrupted Europe and sent America spiraling into debt. It's also what is most politically feasible [WaPo] given the harshness of existing economic conditions and future austerity measures: In a world with zero or negative growth and stagnating employment, capitalism quickly loses its luster. 

Hit the jump to read more on how OWS can revive itself in 2012...

Morning Update: Another Reason to Love Penguins

Penguins are loved around the world for their novelty, charm, and all around awkward-looking mystique.  If you were still out on the outside looking in when it came to doting over the venerable aquatic creature, however, we at Conflict Revolution have dug up another fun fact about the lovable Sphenisciformes Spheniscidae:

They might like fish, but they don't like Newts.  

Now, apparently the former Speaker of the House loves animals, but hasn't he learned anything in his 60+ years about getting too close to them at the zoo? 

And furthermore, I know they live at opposite ends of the earth, but they are also at opposite ends of the food chain: wouldn't you expect a polar bear to be able to take on a penguin?  Just saying.  

Don't even try to deny the similarity

Other links for Thursday 4/26:

1) In further penguin-related reportage, three Australian guys had a night to remember - then saw what they woke up next to ["Penguin Stolen From Sea World Australia By Drunk Thieves," Huffington Post, 4/23/12]

2) That penguin wasn't the only thing biting fingers during the month of April - this is downright disturbing ["Man bites off bartender's pinky finger after having sex in bar," Newark Star-Ledger, 4/2/12]

3) On a more serious note, another piece about the response to the Trayvon Martin shooting.  Did the media see racism and dollar signs? ["Who is 'Racist'," Real Clear Politics, 4/24/12]

4) Also, guess who's received the most negative media coverage so far this campaign season?  I'll give you a hint: it's not a Republican ["Romney's Media Edge Over Obama," The Daily Beast, 4/25/12]

5) Finally, before you buy that plastic water bottle, check out this app for Android smartphones ["WeTap App Finds Drinking Fountains in Any City," GOOD Magazine, 4/25/12]

It's pretty crappy outside, but it's Thursday, so that's got to count for something, right?  Go get some work done... or not. 

Stereotyping: An In-Depth Look

In the aftermath of the Trayvon Martin incident, the issue of stereotyping has once again been hurled into the forefront of the chattering class. In this post, Matt and I will look to critically analyze what is being said and what is not being said concerning this hot-button issue. Unlike past debates where Matt and I have lightly mocked each other's positions, we feel this issue is significantly more sensitive and ignites more passions and emotions than say, economic policy. Thus, we will be taking the issue slowly and carefully in an effort to have the adult conversation that both Matt and I believe is entirely necessary to have. We hope that perhaps others in the media, who would prefer to sensationalize the tragedy for their own selfish agenda (I'm looking at all sides here - you know who you are), would follow our lead and give this event the sincerity, honesty and critical eye it needs and deserves. 

Posted by Stephen (4/7/12):

This issue came up on our Facebook account, and clearly needed to get its own blog post. In the Facebook discussion, essentially Matt's position could be summarized by the following:

Stereotypes exist but should not lead to rational decision making. Many bear the scars of discriminatory legacies and should be looked past if they are to be overcome. A kid in a hoodie is just that and only that - a kid in a hoodie. Wearing such should and ought to have no other connotations.

My thesis for position I will take could be summarized as this: "Stereotyping is an inevitable faucet of the human condition and must be understood and controlled."

The case breaks down as follows:

1. Stereotypes (while perhaps unfortunate) are inevitable as they are ingrained in human evolutionary psychology and biology.
2. Stereotypes (more often than not, and the ones I will be defending) are often based on reality, and so are further difficult to break from
1. Our perception of reality inevitably will impact our future view of the world.
2. It would not be reasonable to expect that our future actions ought not be shaped by past experiences
3. Thus, it would be unreasonable to expect to "overcome" stereotyping
3. Since, stereotyping is both ingrained in human nature and a successful evolutionary tool, it cannot be considered irrational behavior nor eliminated behavior
4. Therefore, since stereotyping cannot be reasonably eliminated, we must seek another way to control the negative impacts.

Now let's get to the meat of the case:

'Joe the Plumber' and Other Republicrazies

I linked to this on my facebook page yesterday as well but I wanted to do a longer post here because I think it's a window into just how far off the rails the Republican party has gone.

Earlier this week former Clinton Labor Secretary Robert Reich tweeted:

"To describe the GOP crackup as extremists vs. moderates is inaccurate. It's really right-wing fanatics vs. mere extremists."

When you consider the fact that the Republican rank-and-file has largely coalesced around a budget proposal that would essentially eliminate the federal government in the long term except for defense spending and entitlements, while cutting taxes even further on the wealthy, I'd already say Reich has a point.

What this is really about, though, are the more radical elements of the GOP base, as represented this week by Samuel Wurzelbacher, aka Joe the Plumber, the erstwhile Ohioan who has gone from instant celebrity during the 2008 presidential campaign to conservative activist to candidate for Congress. In an appearance on CNN, Wurzelbacher was asked a question about a statement he made in 2010 that he would "not allow homosexuals anywhere near his children."

An underappreciated element of HBO's Game Change

Just had an opportunity to watch Game Change, the HBO adaptation of Mark Halperin and John Heilemann's postmortem on the 2008 presidential campaign. The book devoted about a third of its attention to John McCain's now infamous selection of Sarah Palin as his vice-presidential running mate, but it was enough to highlight several unflattering details about Palin, including the fact that she apparently didn't know the difference between North and South Korea.

Needless to say, Palin and her followers didn't exactly approve of the book. So its no surprise that the much-publicized release of the movie this weekend drew similar disapproval from conservatives, with Palin's Political Action Committee referring to the film as "a work of history that never happened."

But let's forget for a second whether or not the movie's dialogue was 100% true (it wasn't, because it was in a movie, and even movies with the most factual fidelity take liberties with their scripts). The movie, like the book, is based on the accounts of individuals closely involved with the campaign, and interprets those accounts accordingly. Parsing over every detail in the film obscures the real points that can and should be taken away from it.

CR Reading List: Shun the Non-Believer!

Stephen posted the article mentioned herein to our facebook page over the weekend, which prompted my confusion. Why would a committed economic conservative like Steve post an article that fails to make a compelling case for any of the basic assumptions underlying the intense Republican opposition to President Obama? Read the original article here. My thoughts below:

Republicans have never done a particularly good job of concealing their efforts to paint Barack Obama as a radical left-wing socialist who doesn't believe in American greatness and wants to fundamentally transform the very nature of our country. I used to think this was to manipulate the Tea Party and other elements of the GOP grassroots. Increasingly, however, I'm not so sure.

It seems that even the party elites and other conservative thought-makers really, actually believe this stuff. Honestly I'm not sure how else to explain Fred Barnes (of The Weekly Standard)'s weird, post-factual account of the recently-released Obama Budget for Fiscal Year 2013.

Read Barnes' take here (The Real Obama - 2/27/12 issue)

More radical socialism after the jump...