Free Trade

When I hear presidential candidates or outspoken locals protest free trade I shudder. Recently, they NYT rode to my rescue in an editorial.

Suppose the critics are right and all those workers were displaced by cheap imports and factories moving overseas. Those lost manufacturing jobs — an average of 400,000 a year — amount to less than 3 percent of the 15 million jobs lost each year across the economy. Meanwhile, about 17 million jobs were created annually, which is why the unemployment rate at the end of 2007 was not much different than it was at the end of 1997.

So much for 'blaming NAFTA', or Bush, or Republicans, eh?

Anyway...

Much later the Times asserts: "increased trade since World War II has added about 10 percent to American national income". Fine. Free trade has been a staple of American foreign policy since the birth of our nation (mixed with fits of protectionism which often made things worse). We've fought wars over it, and engaged in several smaller conflicts over it.

Woodrow Wilson was the first modern advocate of it on the world stage. His ideas failed via Versailles. Which is why 'free trade' had to wait until after WWII as the Times notes.

Change

Saw this movie a couple of weeks ago: (Flyboys) http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0454824/ about The Lafayette Escadrille, a group of American volunteers flying for the French in WWI. I assume they were paid but, there's no specific mention of this fact one way or the other. If they were, it should be noted that France largely financed WWI through the British who did the same through the US. In other words, we paid them, through the British, then the French, with everybody taking a cut along the way no doubt.

This picture drew my attention to this topic today. 'Private military contractors' fighting for foreign governments (aka China) with US assistance in 1941:


We gave China financial assistance, China paid the Flying Tigers $500/kill plus a regular paycheck.

In both cases The Lafayette Escadrille and Flying Tigers were inducted into the regular US Armed Forces as we entered the wars.

There are differences and similarities between these types of groups and military contractors today. I wonder if anyone has explored them? For example, has the size of the modern US military obviated the need for military contractors in the combat arms community? Has the nature of modern combat outstripped the ability of the contractor to participate effectively?

Convergence and Unraveling

As ideas converge, theories often unravel.

A very smart man once told me, and many others present, that wild-eyed conspiracy theories are often the result of white racism. For example, "backdoor" theories about the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941 or those of a US Government plot to perpetrate September 11, 2001. The idea is, the Japanese (or Arabs) could not do such things alone and simply must have had help from with in.

After all, this smart man went on to say, none of these conspiracy theories had any evidence to back them up despite (in the case of Pearl Harbor) decades of searching and many, many books and historians making the case.

Today we see the emergence of a conspiracy theorist who breaks this mold (the "dissident", white, "other" hating). One Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

In addition to what Tigerhawk shows us, the BBC shows that Ahmadinejad has joined the chorus of those who believe that vast numbers of people have died in Iraq.

Lastly, it is well known that, if not a holocaust denier himself, Ahmadinejad certainly promotes holocaust denial and subverts the most documented event in human history. Ahmadinejad says the holocaust"is a myth".

So, as those who believe that 600,000+ people have been killed in Iraq converge with those who deny that Arab terrorists conducted suicide attacks in NYC and those who deny the holocaust took place...the notion that white racism drives these conspiracy theories seems to unravel.

What then is causing different people in different places from different cultures to converge in this way? A hard question for sure.

All this said, there are clearly present day examples of racism driving conspiracy theories...but not the ones my very smart man was thinking of. Watched cable news in the last month? And it's not new. The final quote is fascinating from a philosophical sense:

"The whole notion of conspiracy theories and misinformation...removes personal responsibility,"

Cynicism in Ithaca

Trolling, er, using The Google to surf around Al Gore's internets for various opinions on various topics originating in and around Ithaca I came across this bit of wisdom.

It smacks of the 'Merchants of Death' meme which originated after WWI and never really gained any traction. And by the way, you'll notice that Senator Nye would be of the same populist Republican, um, roots, that modern elites deride as anti-intellectual as I previously showed. That's simply because, to me, the criticism is all politically driven and nothing more. When historians examine the causes of war few credible ones cite profit. In fact, they almost all write that nations and policy makers, particularly American policy makers, seek democracy (from Wilson on) and stability (for they bring markets and profit).

But equally important, perhaps, is this idea that:

"there is not a dime's worth of difference" between the elected officials of the two parties

That, dear readers, is nothing short of utter cynicism that equates every individual elected official with his or her party affiliation regardless of personal experience or conviction. Whether they be African-American, female, or a former POW. There is, somehow, no difference between them or what they would bring to office.

And I haven't even mentioned any specific policies. I'm strictly speaking biography. One might say...well, the criticism was of Congress and you're pointing to presidential candidates. True. But each of the 3 contenders are from, yup, the US Senate.

A Fellow Traveler

Amid all the turmoil in the world the latest major issue in Ithaca is a proposed ban on smoking in public places including the "popular" outdoor shopping center known as the Ithaca Commons.

To set the stage: I don't smoke, and I don't want to ban people from smoking in public. But it seems that local government does.

Enter on Cornell University college student who had a column published in the Ithaca Journal this weekend and did his part for towny-student relations.

Read the whole column. Interesting bits quoted below.

"Quite alarmingly, Ithaca is poised to take a misguided step in smoking regulations that is driven by misrepresentations of scientific conclusions and a legislatively inappropriate moralism that is paradoxically absent in other aspects of local culture...

In 2006, the surgeon general released a strongly worded report that summarized the strong consensus of the scientific evidence that exposure to indoor tobacco smoke posed a public health hazard. But what proponents of outdoor smoking restrictions conveniently omit is that the report included no evidence of the effects of outdoor environmental tobacco smoke...Knowing that they don't have science to back up these policies, many anti-smoker groups have taken a moralistic approach: Smoking is shameful, and the more it is out of the public's eyes, the better. Their logic is eerily similar to that of those who think gay couples shouldn't hold hands in public, but to keep that out of public view."

I found the whole column very effective. But, I'm me and I don't view those people up on the hill (at Cornell University) as part of another tribe.

Olympic Chicanery

The "Free Tibet" slogan enjoys broad support here in Ithaca. Recently, the Olympic torch went through San Francisco aided by some chicanery on the part of local officials. I should think few ithacans would be please by this but, I wonder:

How many of them really even know about it? After all, the most thorough documentation I've seen of the events of that day come from a certain 'zombie' who publishes at http://www.zombietime.com and, sometimes, http://pajamasmedia.com.

His photo-essay of the Olympic Torch Relay can be found here. Reading it (in its entirety) or, the zombietime home page will demonstrate why few ithacas are likely to be aware of his work.

It is, quite simply, verboten.

Doped up Elite Intellectuals

Earlier (my last post in fact) I drew attention to Ike's warning about a "scientific-technological elite" coming to dominate public policy. Today, readers of AFP, like me, learned that these "scientific-technological elite" are in fact all doped up:

Scientists take drugs to boost brain power: study
09/04/2008 18h46

PARIS (AFP) - Twenty percent of scientists admit to using performance-enhancing prescription drugs for non-medical reasons, according to a survey released Wednesday by Nature, Britain's top science journal.

Will Congress investigate? As it did in baseball recently? Don't hold your breath.

Quote and Counter-Quote

LT G offers up Dead Guy Quote (10):

"Here in America we are descended in blood and in spirit from revolutionists and rebels - men and women who dare to dissent from accepted doctrine. As their heirs, may we never confuse honest dissent with disloyal subversion." -- Dwight Eisenhower

I like, um, it.

Others, lots of them in Ithaca no doubt, would reply that Ike also warned of the Military Industrial Complex:

"In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist."

Some would say to LT G, you're just a cog in the machine man, can't you see it!?

But they ignore the totality of Ike's farewell address. For a mere handful of lines later he says (and this is particularly worthy of consideration in the context of Global Warming):

"Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite."

The same elites who warn of danger via Ike's address in the Military-Industrial Complex, if they acknowledge this later warning at all call it anti-intellectualism.

Framing

Framing.

"If you are among those who wonder why the Democrats have a reputation for being anti-military and soft on national defense, look no further"

The entire post is worth your attention. TigerHawk on Nancy Pelosi framing the looming testimony from Gen. Petraeus. Who's framing here? Congressional Democrats or, right-of-center bloggers depends on your, er, frame of reference.

But in Ithaca, I know where most people stand on the issue. I just wonder if our Senator (C-type) will be present to question the General after her last round during which she, more or less, called him a liar and he went on to turn Iraq from a war about to be a lost and a political hand grenade into a winnable war and a potentially winning political issue (witness John McCain).

Also, I'd just like to point out, in 2006 Tompkins County gave Hillary Clinton over 67% of it's vote in compared to 27% for the Republican candidate. Heck, the Green Party candidate got 5%!

But, that's Ithaca.

Decoy or Placeholder?

George W. Bush, with help from others no doubt, has secured NATO agreement to build a ballistic missile shield in Europe. But those same NATO allies have refused to admit Ukraine and Georgia to the alliance (see NYT piece).

Russia objects to both the shield and the admission of the two former Soviet, er, Republics. France and Germany object to the admission of the two former Soviet states on the grounds that it would stir Russia's ire. As if the missile shield will not.

One In From The Cold characterizes this outcome more or less as a "damned if we do, damned if we don't" outcome. He says, more or less, that clearing a path for Ukraine and Georgia to join NATO would have angered Putin and Russia but that having backed down:

"is likely to embolden Russia, which will continue its campaign of threats and economic sanctions against both countries."

That's not exactly ideal. But I wonder, was the Ukraine/Georgia issue a real issue at all? Was it a mere placeholder for future expansion? Or, was it a decoy to help EU NATO members feel as if they had reach compromise with Bush by avoiding undue NATO expansion but agreeing to the missile sheild?

Only time will tell.

EDIT (7:49PM EST) The Belmont Club seems to hold the view that Bush has set down a placeholder with regard to Ukraine and Georgia. I tend to agree. I try not to be overly cynical about these things.

Priorities and Perspective.

Which is more important? I admit, at present, it's impossible to know as we could be at the precipice of global economic catastrophe. But nonetheless, I put it to you.

On economy, GOP chair prefers McCain
Mike Sigler / Guest Column

A lot of hay has been made over an offhand remark by John McCain that economics was not his strongest suit. That would carry some weight with me if Democrats Sen. Hillary Clinton or Sen. Barack Obama were well versed in economic policy, but they're not. So it's curious that they're making it a talking point in their campaigns. Just from their positions and votes, I hope it's clear to everyone that McCain has a better grasp of economics than his opponents.

The columnists argument goes: taxes, free-trade, entitlements. I like it. Most ithacans will not. I assure you.

Meanwhile...

THE WORLD FROM BERLIN

'NATO Is not a Land-Grabbing Monster'
The US may want NATO to admit Ukraine and Georgia but Germany and France argue that such a move would unnecessarily provoke Russia. Many German papers on Wednesday question whether enlargement eastwards would really do anything to enhance security.

You may ask: Ukraine? Seriously? With Iraq (the "worst foreign policy disaster in US History") you're asking about Ukraine? I'd point out that Ukraine (an Eastern Orthodox country) sits between the expanding EU and a neo-czarist Russia and currently owns the world's 3^rd largest arsenal of nuclear weapons. That is, larger than the UK's or France's.

Georgia, has no atomic arsenal. It was once the Democratic Republic of Georgia before being destroyed by the Red Army and made into a Soviet Republic (around the same time and in the same manner as was Ukraine BTW). Now, like Ukraine, it sits along one of the 'bloody borders' of two great civilizations (in this case, Georgia happens to border Eastern Orthodoxy and Islam).

Recession sux. Bringing these two states into the western fold might be more important. Er, how about: Allowing states like the Ukraine and Georgia to slip back uunder Moscow's domination (with their nuclear arsenals and strategic locations) might amount to the first real diplomatic disaster of the 21^st century? Isn't undermining the 'Clash of Civilizations' narrative more important than an economic blip?

Or, in a few years will we be asking, who lost Ukraine/Georgia?

Media Literacy

I often champion media literacy among my close friends, family, etc. But, if you can figure this bit out, please enlighten me.

The first article.

U.S. Armor Forces Join Offensive In Baghdad Against Sadr Militia
Americans Appear To Take the Lead As Iraqi Units Wait

By Sudarsan Raghavan and Sholnn Freeman
Washington Post Foreign Service
Friday, March 28, 2008; Page A01

BAGHDAD, March 27 --

...

Four U.S. Stryker armored vehicles were seen in Sadr City by a Washington Post correspondent, one of them engaging Mahdi Army militiamen with heavy fire. The din of American weapons, along with the Mahdi Army's AK-47s and rocket-propelled grenades, was heard through much of the day. U.S. helicopters and drones buzzed overhead...

This was indeed published in the midst of the Sadrist uprising of late with some accompanying estimates as to the dead and wounded. Today the following was published.

The second article.

U.S. Appears to Take Lead in Fighting in Baghdad
U.S. Forces Battle Mahdi Army in Sadr City, Aircraft Target Basra

By Sudarsan Raghavan and Sholnn Freeman
Washington Post Foreign Service
Tuesday, April 1, 2008; 9:58 AM

BAGHDAD, March 28 --

...

Four U.S. Stryker armored vehicles were seen in Sadr City by a Washington Post correspondent, one of them engaging Mahdi Army militiamen with heavy fire. The din of U.S. weapons, along with the Mahdi Army's AK-47s and rocket-propelled grenades, was heard through much of the day. U.S. helicopters and drones buzzed overhead.

So, I see that it was filed on the 28^th and that surely accounts for the nearly identical early narrative and language. But still, it concludes with, er, estimates as to the dead and wounded, and not a statement to the fact that the Sadrists have called off the revolt inspite of the fact that 'additional reporting' was provided by a number of people likely in the DC office.

What's the process here?

And yes, I know what a wire service report is. I read them (AFP mostly). Is WaPo a wire service? Now?

It's hard to see this as a wire service report...it's certainly not timely (note the 3 day delay in filing and publishing!).