Quote of the Day – Thomas Sowell Edition

I think we’re raising whole generations who regard facts as more or less optional. We have kids in elementary school who are being urged to take stands on political issues, to write letters to congressmen and presidents about nuclear energy. They’re not a decade old, and they’re being thrown these kinds of questions that can absorb the lifetime of a very brilliant and learned man. And they’re being taught that it’s important to have views, and they’re not being taught that it’s important to know what you’re talking about. It’s important to hear the opposite viewpoint, and more important to learn how to distinguish why viewpoint A and viewpoint B are different, and which one has the most evidence or logic behind it. They disregard that. They hear something, they hear some rhetoric, and they run with it.Uncommon Knowledge, Economic Facts and Fallacies interview, Part V

Thomas Sowell is now 80 years old. I get the feeling that he’s glad that he won’t be around to see the worst of what’s coming.

Aren’t Almost All Politicians?

an almost pathologically fluid liar….

There’s been a bit of interest in a recent post about psychopaths in places of power. Excerpt:

Rape a housekeeper… you might be a psychopath.

Lie to the nation about having sex with an intern… you might be a psychopath.

Having multiple public affairs while putting at risk the largest endorsements in the world… you might be a psychopath.

Cheat on your wife and have a love child with house hold staff… you might be a psychopath.

Cheat on your wife with $3,000 an hour prostitutes while prosecuting others… you might be a psychopath.

Divorce your wife while she is recovering from surgery… you might be a psychopath.

Cheat on your wife, father a love child, have a sex tape, and asking for a divorce, while your wife is dying form cancer… you might be a psychopath.

Blow a million dollar TV career on coke and hookers… you might be a psychopath.

Create financial instruments that you knew were going to blow up the housing market… you might be a psychopath.

Create a billion dollar Ponzi scheme to steal billions… you might be a psychopath.

Hide billions of losses in off the books shell corporations to pump up your stock… you might be a psychopath.

Claim that you are doing “God’s work” while your company sucks the life blood out of the company… you might be a psychopath.

Show no remorse for 500,000 dead Iraqi children… you might be a psychopath.

Lie to a nation about the real reason we are going to war… you might be a psychopath.

Lie to a nation about the real strength of the dollar… you might be a banker.

Talk about coming back as a deadly virus to eradicate over population… you might be a psychopath.

Create and fund wars to steal others natural resources… you might be a psychopath.

Help support tyrannical regimes all over the world… you might be a psychopath.

Holding up the American taxpayer to bailout your buddies… you might be a psychopath.

Perpetuating a huge lie in order to to become a carbon credit billionaire and sexually assaulting a masseuse … you might be a psychopath.

These are the people who grasp for the levers of power. These are the people we’re supposed to trust to do what’s right, not what is personally beneficial, expedient, easy. These are the people the media is supposed to vet, not anoint.

There’s also this recent book, The Psychopath Test. Watch the embedded video there.

There’s a preponderance of psychopaths, people with a complete lack of human empathy at the heart of the political and business elites.

But Government = Good, Business = Bad!  That’s what we’re constantly told.  Just put the right people in charge of government, and things will be made RIGHT!

But it never is.  And it’s never their fault.  The solutions were just poorly implemented!  There was too much resistance from reactionaries!  We didn’t spend enough money!  The philosophy cannot be wrong!  We must do it again, only HARDER!

The Founders understood, and that is why they wrote a Constitution of defined, limited powers. And that’s why that Constitution had to be folded, spindled, mutilated and made void.

Entropy sucks.

And Yet Another

Following up on the previous post, Instapundit links to a piece about playwright David Mamet and his new book on losing his liberal outlook.  Some choice excerpts:

Higher ed, (Mamet) said, was an elaborate scheme to deprive young people of their freedom of thought. He compared four years of college to a lab experiment in which a rat is trained to pull a lever for a pellet of food. A student recites some bit of received and unexamined wisdom—”Thomas Jefferson: slave owner, adulterer, pull the lever”—and is rewarded with his pellet: a grade, a degree, and ultimately a lifelong membership in a tribe of people educated to see the world in the same way.

“If we identify every interaction as having a victim and an oppressor, and we get a pellet when we find the victims, we’re training ourselves not to see cause and effect,” he said. Wasn’t there, he went on, a “much more interesting .  .  . view of the world in which not everything can be reduced to victim and oppressor?”

This is the whole strategy of “critical theory” – the Frankfurt school’s methodology for using the education system to de-moralize (hypen used intentionally) the population. Thomas Jefferson? He can’t be a great man, he was a slave owner and adulterer! Pull the lever!  Writing an essay on economics?  The grader will be a Keynesian, so it had better slant that way!  Pull the lever!

On cognitive dissonance:

“The question occurs to me quite a lot: What do liberals do when their plans have failed? What did the writers do when their plans led to unemployment, their own and other people’s? One thing they can’t do is admit they failed. Why? To admit failure would endanger their position in the herd.”

To admit failure would require them to question their ideology, and that loses them their position in the herd.

In the beginning of Mamet’s conversion, his Rabbi sent him books:

One of the first was A Conflict of Visions, by Thomas Sowell of the Hoover Institution. In it Sowell expands on the difference between the “constrained vision” of human nature—close to the tragic view that infuses Mamet’s greatest plays—and the “unconstrained vision” of man’s endless improvement that suffused Mamet’s politics and the politics of his profession and social class.

“He came back to me stunned. He said, ‘This is incredible!’ He said, ‘Who thinks like this? Who are these people?’ I said, ‘Republicans think like this.’ He said, ‘Amazing.’ ”

I didn’t have to be converted by Sowell’s magnum opus, but Conflict of Vision‘s effect on me was similar.

And, of course, the article points out the inevitable herd reaction to Mamet’s conversion:

After reading The Secret Knowledge in galleys, the Fox News host and writer Greg Gutfeld invented the David Mamet Attack Countdown Clock, which “monitors the days until a once-glorified liberal artist is dismissed as an untalented buffoon.” Tick tock.

Read the whole piece.

I think I just added another book onto my pile.

Book Review – Hard Magic: Book I of the Grimnoir Chronicles

I finished Hard Magic at 5:30 this morning, sitting on my john (lid down) wrapped in a towel, still dripping from the shower. I downloaded the ebook from Baen’s website thanks to friend and shooting buddy Dusty, and installed it on my iPod Touch a couple of days ago. I started reading it Saturday.  I couldn’t bring myself to go to work without finishing it first.

Zeppelins. Magic. Zombies. Ninjas. Teleporting magic ninjas!  Gun molls. John Moses Browning (PBUH). The obligatory honorable hero giant. A cute and spunky teenage heroine. Love.  Betrayal. Otherworldly monsters.  Death.  Mayhem.  Worldwide conspiracies. Did I mention Zeppelins?

This is the third book by John W. Campbell Award finalist Larry Correia I’ve read. I’m with him, it’s is best work yet. Larry writes page turners. You suspend disbelief and want to know what’s NEXT!

Damned fun read. Highly recommended. And I can’t wait for whatever’s next. Dead Six, is it?

If you want a taste of the Grimnoir world, Larry has posted a prequel short-story.

Anybody Seen This?

[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PblVo9y735k?rel=0]

I’d like to know more about it.  I can’t remember hearing anything about it in the media or on the blogs back in 2009. It certainly didn’t come up during the 2010 election.  Lots of mentions of “social justice.” Make sure you check today’s QotD.

Accuracy in Media had something on it.  Here’s Howard Dean’s full speech on Vimeo. Lots of other related video as well.

I wrote a post back in 2005, True Believers, where I quoted from another blogger, Glenn Wishard of Canis Iratus in his post A Thumbnail History of the Twentieth Century. I’ll quote it here again:

The rise and fall of the Marxist ideal is rather neatly contained in the Twentieth Century, and comprises its central political phenomenon. Fascism and democratic defeatism are its sun-dogs. The common theme is politics as a theology of salvation, with a heroic transformation of the human condition (nothing less) promised to those who will agitate for it. Political activity becomes the highest human vocation. The various socialisms are only the most prominent manifestation of this delusion, which our future historian calls “politicism”. In all its forms, it defines human beings as exclusively political animals, based on characteristics which are largely or entirely beyond human control: ethnicity, nationality, gender, and social class. It claims universal relevance, and so divides the entire human race into heroes and enemies. To be on the correct side of this equation is considered full moral justification in and of itself, while no courtesy or concession can be afforded to those on the other. Therefore, politicism has no conscience whatsoever, no charity, and no mercy.

(Emphasis in original.) I commented:

I think Glenn’s declaration that the 20th Century “neatly contains” the rise and fall of “the Marxist ideal” is a bit premature, but I fully concur with his conclusion that “politicism” has neatly divided societies in the manner described….

True Believers still holds up five years on.

Howard Dean blames the current state of the global economy on “the free market,” but as others have noted, we have not experienced free markets — that is, the invisible hand — for decades. No, the Progressive love for “social justice” (the New Deal, the Great Society, etc. etc. etc.) has shoved a stick into the spokes of free trade repeatedly. But it can’t be their fault, they meant well.

Time to do it again, ONLY HARDER!

Mr. Wishard appended to his “History” post this observation:

I really do think that history will look back on the 20th century as the absolute low point of human history – as bad as anything the Dark Ages offered, without any of the excuses.

I think, once again, that he was premature.  And optimistic.

I found an interesting quote this evening from a Google search that led to this site.  Someone searched on the phrase “I’m a pessimist,” and found this post from last year, but when I did the same search, what I found was more interesting, and more applicable to this topic:

I’m a pessimist because of intelligence, but an optimist because of will. — Antonio Gramsci

Yeah, that Gramsci.

We’re getting not what Gramsci wanted, but we are getting what he worked for.

A couple of days ago, I ran across another reference to Jane Jacobs. I first saw mention of her in an Orson Scott Card column from 2004, Who Was On Watch As the Dark Age Approached? I cited that piece and his mention of Ms. Jacobs in my 2009 essay Restoring the Lost Constitution. Card said this:

Jacobs sees us as being well down the road to a self-inflicted Dark Age, in which we will have thrown away many of the very things that made our civilization so dominant, so prosperous, so successful. We are not immune to the natural laws that govern the formation and dissolution of human communities: When the civilization no longer provides the benefits that lead to success, then, unsurprisingly, the civilization is likely to fail.

As she says in her introduction, “People living in vigorous cultures typically treasure those cultures and resist any threat to them. How and why can a people so totally discard a formerly vital culture that it becomes literally lost?” 
Dark Age Ahead gives us a series of concrete examples of exactly that process. 
“Every culture,” she says, “takes pains to educate its young so that they, in their turn, can practice and transmit it completely.” Our civilization, however, is failing to do that. On the contrary, we are systematically training our young not to embrace the culture that brought us greatness.

A civilization is truly dead, she says, when “even the memory of what has been lost is lost.”

Just a few days ago, Jerry Pournell repeated the warning:

Readers should be aware of Jane Jacobs, Dark Age Ahead. Civilization is more fragile than most believe. Note that a true dark age comes not when we lose the ability to do something, but forget that we ever had that ability: as for instance no university Department of Education seems aware that in the 1930’s to the end of World War II, essentially the only adult illiterates in the United States were people who had never been to school to begin with (see the Army’s tests of conscripts). My mother had a 2-year Normal School degree and taught first grade in rural Florida, not considered a high intelligence population. I once asked her if any of her students left first grade without learning to read. She said, “Well, there were a few, but they didn’t learn anything else, either.” The notion that a child could get out of elementary school unable to read was simply shocking up to about 1950 when new University Education Department theories of reading emerged. Now a majority of students read “below grade level” and actual functional illiteracy approaches 15%.

Anyway, that’s what we mean by a Dark Age. As with the 5th Century peasant in France who gets a yield of perhaps 3 bushels a year on land that under Roman civilization yielded 12 — and has not only forgotten how to get such yields, but has no idea that such yields have ever been possible. Or a civilization that spends more and more on schools that cannot accomplish what was once standard in country schools like Capleville (where I went 4 – 8th grade), or even remember what was accomplished.

Billy Beck calls what’s coming The Endarkenment.

I’m beginning to believe that Billy’s an optimist, too.

I’m going to take a few days off.  Please talk amongst yourselves.

Publishing

There was a pretty damned fascinating piece Instapundit linked to today. It basically spells out the coming death of major publishing houses, or at least their current business model. The weapon? Ebooks at 99¢.

I’m a late adopter of the eBook, I’ll admit. I can’t see popping $139 for a Kindle or $149 for a Nook. ($249 for the color version.) My $175 EeePC Netbook is about the size of a hardback, but I find hardbacks awkward to tote around.

Then I found out that there was a free eBook app for my iPod Touch, iBook. Initially I thought the screen would be too small to be usable as a book reader, but my shooting buddy DustyC showed me that his worked just fine. The last book I purchased, Lois McMaster Bujold‘s Cryoburn (hardback) came with a DVD containing not only electronic copies of that novel in all major formats including PDF and HTML but eight other novels and The Vorkosigan Companion. I was getting ready for a trip to Canada, and I thought, “What the hell?” I loaded the app, and copied over the nine books.

And I LOVE the damned thing. It’s tiny, drops easily into my shirt pocket, it’s still easily readable (and being illuminated, I can read in poorly lit restaurants which I cannot do with a dead-tree book), it has excellent battery life, I can carry a pretty decent library on half the 16GB of memory.

But most books cost every bit as much as a premium paperback, and those are getting pricey these days.

Baen, Bujold’s publisher, was one of the first adopters of eBooks, and got in early with free eBooks for download. Sort of a drug-pusher’s “first taste is free” to get you hooked on an author. So I can go to Baen’s website and download a lot more books, but they’re probably also books I’ve already read in dead-tree edition. I tend to read a lot, and I like Baen’s stable of authors.  (I’d read all of Bujold’s previous Vorkosigan Saga novels, but I didn’t mind reading them again.)

But the article Instapundit linked puts a whole new spin on the topic.

Roberta X has recently self-published her novel, I Work on a Starship, and she’s selling it as an eBook for $1.99, or dead-tree for $18.82. The download is PDF only. That’s OK, there’s a PDF reader for the iPod, but I haven’t installed it on mine. There are, however, about a dozen other formats for book readers (I use the iBook format) and she’s not reaching those customers.

Author John Locke (LOVE the nom de plume) has six of the top 40 eBooks on Amazon right now, and one of them is #1. All of his books are available in all formats, and all of them are 99¢. Out of each sale, the author sees 35¢. His total cost involved is the time it takes him to write a story, and about $1k to give it to a third party for formatting it for all the different readers, and produce “cover art” for the book. As he puts it,

I make back the one-time price by selling 3,000 eBooks, and every sale thereafter is unencumbered.

The interview was done yesterday, March 8. Between January 1 and March 8, he sold 350,000 Kindle-formatted copies of one novel alone. Do the math. That’s $122,500 in just barely over two months.

Now, obviously John Locke is an exception (it does require the ability to write something that people will praise, after all) but listen to this:

For the first time in history, there’s an advantage to being an independent author!

It wasn’t so long ago that an aspiring author would complete his or her manuscript, only to don a pair of knee pads and assume a supplicating posture in order to beg agents to beg publishers to read their work. And from way on high, the publishers would bestow favor upon this one or that, and those who failed to get the nod were out of the game.

No more.

These days the buying public looks at a $9.95 eBook and pauses. It’s not an automatic sale. And the reason it’s not is because the buyer knows when an eBook is priced ten times higher than it has to be. And so the buyer pauses. And it is in this pause—this golden, sweet-scented pause—that we independent authors gain the advantage, because we offer incredible value.

The Gatekeepers once again have lost their power. The walls keeping the unwashed masses out have fallen down.

I’m new to the writing game. But if I’d started self-publishing even three years ago, I would have spent all my time trying to prove to the public I’m just as good as the top authors in America. These days, the burden of proof is on them. Now the best authors in America have to prove they’re ten times better than me. And in a game like that, I like my chances.

The interviewer of John Locke is also an author selling his wares on Amazon. He said:

Coming from a legacy publishing background, I knew that 35% royalties were much better than anything the Big 6 offered. Even so, when I first got into this, I thought that cheap ebooks would be a loss lead, that would get people to read my more expensive books.

And yet, when I lowered the price of The List from $2.99 to 99 cents, I started selling 20x as many copies–about 800 a day. My loss lead became my biggest earner.

Do that math. He went from making $2.09 per book to $0.35 per book, but he sold twenty times as many books. Forty books a day at $2.09 a book is $83.60 a day. Eight hundred books at 35¢ is $280 a day.

Not too long back, Larry Correia self-published Monster Hunter International in dead-tree format, and did so well a major publishing house picked him up and gave him a multi-book deal. Baen now sells the eBook version at $6.00.

I have to wonder if Larry might not have done better staying independent.

Hey Roberta! Are you going to port I Work on a Starship to iBook format?

Quote of the Day II – Blindingly Obvious Edition

The elite live in a different country than the rest of Americans. It is not possible to understand the System and its actions without understanding this fact. The elite see its own ascendancy as just, and cannot understand the anger below. Yet the rules for success used by the elite are often very different from the rules observed by ordinary people. This leads the elite to believe that those below ‘cannot be told’ the real reason for decisions that are made. The question becomes what should the people be told, not what the facts are. The perplexity of the voter who tries first one party and then the other, winding up always with the same elite, shows how democracy has given way to rule by the System’s managers. Shared knowledge leads to shared assumptions, which are even more crucial than  knowledge in making it possible for the elite managers to work together without  ‘conspiracy.’ These invisible shared assumptions are the real Constitution, the real fundamental law, which guides the System.

Charles A. Reich, Opposing the System

I somehow doubt I share much in common with Mr. Reich from a socio-political standpoint, but our viewpoints certainly coincide on this position.