"Axis of Evil" and "The War on Terror"

On NPR's All Things Considered yesterday, they had a little piece on the Obama administration's decision to quietly eschew the use of the phrase "War on Terror." Words matter.

On the rhetorical flipside, below you'll find some text from President Bush's 2002 State of the Union Address. Let's compare the two approaches.

"Our second goal is to prevent regimes that sponsor terror from threatening America or our friends and allies with weapons of mass destruction.

"Some of these regimes have been pretty quiet since September 11, but we know their true nature. North Korea is a regime arming with missiles and weapons of mass destruction, while starving its citizens.

"Iran aggressively pursues these weapons and exports terror, while an unelected few repress the Iranian people's hope for freedom.

"Iraq continues to flaunt its hostility toward America and to support terror. The Iraqi regime has plotted to develop anthrax and nerve gas and nuclear weapons for over a decade. This is a regime that has already used poison gas to murder thousands of its own citizens, leaving the bodies of mothers huddled over their dead children. This is a regime that agreed to international inspections then kicked out the inspectors. This is a regime that has something to hide from the civilized world.

"States like these, and their terrorist allies, constitute an axis of evil, arming to threaten the peace of the world. By seeking weapons of mass destruction, these regimes pose a grave and growing danger. They could provide these arms to terrorists, giving them the means to match their hatred. They could attack our allies or attempt to blackmail the United States. In any of these cases, the price of indifference would be catastrophic."

Don DeLillo on 9/11

Hold the phone and stop the presses! Talk about "sources" -- here's an essay on 9/11 that none other than Don DeLillo wrote for Harper's magazine and that was then reprinted in The Guardian (a well-regarded magazine in the UK). It's as if I planned it...but I didn't. Thank goodness for serendipity!!

WTC -- 9/11

Update/Re-cap (1:13 p.m.): Honestly, I didn't like having the unadorned 9/11 image on the blog. Too unsettling. In fact, I was going to bring in some YouTube footage from the day, but just didn't have the stomach for it. It almost fully recreates the experience; in fact, from my perspective (and the vast majority of the world's perspective) it does fully recreate the experience I had.

That's the idea we're going to start with tomorrow, keeping in mind the shared experiences of 9/11 that we talked about today in class. Namely dropping what you were doing, watching the non-stop coverage, not knowing what the heck was happening, connecting with loved ones, etc.

And then we're going to try to get at least a basic handle on "what the heck was [and wasn't] happening" and what 21CC those happenings raise.

One last thing. We only sort of obliquely mentioned this in class, but I see a connection between the 9/11 experience and the passage we read in White Noise today. Jack says:

I watched the audience. Folded arms, heads slightly tilted. The predictions did not seem reckless to them. They were content to exchange brief and unrelated remarks, as during a break for a commercial on TV. The tabloid future, with its mechanism of a hopeful twist to apocalyptic events, was perhaps not so very remote from our own immediate experience. Look at us, I thought. Forced out of our homes, sent streaming into the bitter night, pursued by a toxic cloud, crammed together in makeshift quarters, ambiguously death-sentenced. We'd become part of the public stuff of media disaster. The small audience of the old and blind recognized the predictions of the psychics as events so near to happening they had to be shaped in advance to our needs and wishes. Out of some persistent sense of large-scale ruin, we kept inventing hope.

First of all, what was/is 9/11 [i.e., Terrorism] but an ambiguous sort of "death sentence," not too unlike Jack's Nyolene-D "contamination?" It may get us, it may not -- but it's out there. And we're supposed to go and live our lives normally anyway because we don't have any other option.

And then there's the idea of a "hopeful twist to apocalyptic events," that "out of some persistent sense of large-scale ruin, we kept reinventing hope."

I don't know if you were too young to remember this feeling, but the groundswell of unity and, yes, even hope in the days and months immediately after 9/11 was absolutely palpable. It was particularly intense in the U.S., but even abroad there was a circling of the wagons that brought people together. I would say that it produced a significantly larger sense of unity (and, yes, hope) than President Obama's election did. It crossed every kind of factional line -- politics, race, gender, class, age, etc.

Here's a pertinent NY Times book review of Middletown, America: One Town's Passage from Trauma to Hope. Also here's the NYT's 9/11 page -- which, as you can imagine, is enormous.

I'm not 100% sure what to make of these observations. At this point, I'm just making them. Let's keep these ideas on our radar as we move on throughout the week.

Blog-Day!

Pick one of the posts below related to this week's tomfoolery and hijinks and post a thoughtful comment. (Posts in question: Sources of [Mis]Information, Celebrity Culture, Definition of Myth, Cult of Personality, Part I: Oprah, Cult of Personality, Part II: James Frey)

Then move on to your own blog. You can address specific things from this week's class or turn your attention to your own 21CC preoccupations. I want you to include a link, especially because we've been talking about sources a lot this week.

Think about where you're getting your information. Run your sources through the Logos-Pathos-Ethos wringer. Buzzword: BALANCE! They should have a little bit of all three.

Also think about the journalistic "best practice" of getting MULTIPLE SOURCES. Here's an idea: how's about two links in the same post -- either corroborating or refuting each other. Then you analyze it and decide where you stand.

That's not just how you write a good blog post. It's how you navigate your little raft of inquiry on the raging flood of information that is the 21C.

Sources of (Mis)Information

It seems to me that what we've been talking about so far is sources.

Myth is a certain kind of source material -- myths reflect (and maybe even help form) a culture's shared values and they often help explain various kinds of cultural/phenomenal origins.

White Noise's Murray would argue that television is a source of shared cultural values.

Jack is the pre-eminent source when it comes to Hitler scholarship.

Oprah is a source of information and advice on how to "live your best life," and she's also a source of a certain kind of intimacy.

In all of these sources, there's a certain amount of subjectivity built in.

Then there's the way "source" is defined in a journalistic context. A source is someone/something we can go to for basically objective information we can bank on. And here I use the term "bank" on purpose.

Watch this: Stewart vs. Cramer.

Some questions:

• Which of these sources is more credible?
• How is what Jon Stewart does different from what Jim Cramer does?
• What do we do to keep our sources straight?

For what it's worth, Washington Post op-ed columnist Richard Cohen rides to Jim Cramer's rescue.

Celebrity Culture

FYI: Here's a link to an article in BBC News re: how younguns over there are buying into celebrity culture hook-line-and-sinker. (Turns out this isn't an America-only phenomenon...who knew?!) Here's the sub-head on the article: "Children's educational aspirations risk being damaged by the cult of celebrity, teachers' leaders have warned."

Innarresting...

Definition of Myth

In the time-honored (a.k.a. "cliched") move of research papers everywhere, how 'bout let's look up what the dictionary says the term "myth" means. From the Merriam-Webster folks:

1 a: a usually traditional story of ostensibly historical events that serves to unfold part of the world view of a people or explain a practice, belief, or natural phenomenon b: parable , allegory 2 a: a popular belief or tradition that has grown up around something or someone; especially one embodying the ideals and institutions of a society or segment of society b: an unfounded or false notion 3: a person or thing having only an imaginary or unverifiable existence 4: the whole body of myths

And then we can go to Joseph Campbell, who is probably the pre-eminent American thinker/scholar on the role of myth in the human experience. Here's what he had to say about it: "Myths are public dreams, dreams are private myths."

Also here's what he (Campbell) has to say about Star Wars:

"Man should not be in the service of society, society should be in the service of man. When man is in the service of society, you have a monster state, and that's what is threatening the world at this minute. ...Certainly Star Wars has a valid mythological perspective. It shows the state as a machine and asks, "Is the machine going to crush humanity or serve humanity?" Humanity comes not from the machine but from the heart. What I see in Star Wars is the same problem that Faust gives us: Mephistopheles, the machine man, can provide us with all the means, and is thus likely to determine the aims of life as well. But of course the characteristic of Faust, which makes him eligible to be saved, is that he seeks aims that are not those of the machine. Now, when Luke Skywalker unmasks his father, he is taking off the machine role that the father has played. The father was the uniform. That is power, the state role....

"Darth Vader has not developed his own humanity. He's a robot. He's a bureaucrat, living not in terms of himself but in terms of an imposed system. This is the threat to our lives that we all face today. Is the system going to flatten you out and deny you your humanity, or are you going to be able to make use of the system to the attainment of human purposes? How do you relate to the system so that you are not compulsively serving it? It doesn't help to try to change it to accord with your system of thought. The momentum of history behind it is too great for anything really significant to evolve from that kind of action. The thing to do is learn to live in your period of history as a human being. That's something else, and it can be done."

What would Murray think? What do YOU think?

Cult of Personality Part I: Oprah

Let's start with Oprah's website. What does it tell us about her? About her viewers?

Now let's move on to what sometimes happens on Oprah's show:



Finally let's consider Oprah as an agent of social change:

Cult of Personality Part II: James Frey

Now let's talk about the James Frey phenomenon. He wrote a book about his years as a drug addict and all-around n'er-do-well, and Oprah endorsed it for her book club. Turns out he fabricated significant portions of the book. Here is some background information at various places on the internet.

The original fracas was set off by...

--Smoking Gun Expose: "A Million Little Lies"

At first, Oprah supported Frey and the book. Then...

--Oprah goes on the attack

The more recent "aftermath" for Frey...

--James Frey interview with USAToday
--James Frey interview with Vanity Fair

White Noise Cyber-Compendia

Here are some resources for you re: White Noise:

...here, from Time's 100 All-Time English-Language Novels, a brief summary and a review from when the book came out.

...here's the NY Times review when the book came out. Also the NY Times DeLillo page on its "Life & Times" section.

...here's The New York Review of Books review when the book came out.

...Last but not least, here is a study guide. (Horrors!)

We'll talk about how to use this material to augment your understanding of the book. I'm primarily interested in using the novel as a springboard to exploring the ways media and consumer culture influences us: our fears, our loves, our hopes, dreams, and aspirations. And we're going to go through it fairly quickly (no more than a week when we get back -- ideally three days). I don't intend to "cover" White Noise in total. It's too complex a book for that. I want its ideas, its preoccupations, "in the room" with us as we think about the big ideas listed above. I also want us to think about the fact that this book was written in the mid-1980s -- the Internet didn't even exist in anything like its current form. No e-mail. Cell phones. Facebook. None of that. How does it hold up a generation after its publication?

It should go without saying (but I'll go ahead and say it anyway) that I don't want you to use the links above as a substitute for reading the book. I want you to use them to help you read the book better, both in terms of efficiency and depth.

Food Fuel and Water 3: Food

The data are in: Corn is genetically modified. So are Rice Crispies. Maybe that Kale was genetically modified. But it was raised here at school using all organic and sustainable techniques. The Blue Corn Chips, certified "Organic" by the USDA, had some genetically modified ingredients.

According to the Bio-Rad, the company that supplied us with the testing materials, 85% of all corn and soy crops are genetically modified. Further, farms and agribusiness that use genetically modified corn and soy do not have to disclose that information to the consumer.

I will go on record as saying I don't think that Genetic Modification of food is bad. I see the GM movement, or the "Gene Revolution" (Raney and Pingali, 2007), as a natural extension of modern agricultural practice. As you read in Raney and Pingali's article, however, the GM movement is not without its detractors. The GM movement is not the perfect solution for unsustainable agriculture, nor is it the only solution for feeding the 800,000,000 malnurished or starving humans that share our planet.

Based on what you think, what you've learned from our discussions, and what you "gleaned" from your reading, write a comment based one of these two prompts:

1) If you had to craft a U.S. or U.N. policy to regulate the distribution, production, and use of Genetically Modified crops, what three policy descisions would you make. Why? What evidence do you have to guide your policy decisions?

2) If you were going to organize a protest against GM foods on the National Mall on Washington DC, what three things would you protest and why? Would you be a hypocrytical as a protestor, given that you liklely benefited from GM products the day of the protest? Would that stop you from protesting?

Food, Fuel and Water 2: Water.

Water. Nothing is more elemental. Nothing is more crucial for our species’ survival. Our ability to conserve water and use it efficiently may be the great challenge of the 21st century. Although energy and the economy are on everyone’s mind, water issues should not be far from the public conscious; and water issues should be part of the public discourse. Water is essential for energy production (especially nuclear power and coal-fired power plants. Take that Joe Scarborough.), food production, manufacturing, and public health.

Birmingham is uniquely positioned in terms of water issues. We’ve got one of the most biologically diverse ecosystems in the world, the Cahaba River, running through our metropolitan area. We’re located in Alabama’s most populated county (Jefferson), the state with most river miles than any other state in the country. Many prominent scientists, E. O. Wilson among them, have argued that our aquatic resources are our most prized economic engine. That economic engine, however, can’t be used to its potential because a $350 million dollar sewer debt is about to bankrupt the county.

Remember the flooding of New Orleans following Hurricane Katrina? Remember the Minnesota bridge collapse in August of 2008? The root causes of those disasters were acute infrastructure failings caused by years of chronic neglect, a lack of adequate planning, and an inability to manage growth. The elected officials of Jefferson County, and the appointed officials of the Birmingham Water Works, have created an equally precarious infrastructure problem. Our sewer debt may not result in individual deaths, but it threatens to rip the county into rancorous fiefdoms pitting individual wants over the needs of everyone. This sewer debt will make it more difficult to attract businesses and economic growth that our state desperately needs.

Meanwhile, the four million-plus residents of our big neighbor to the east have set off an interstate water war that requires federal mediation. Urban and suburban population growth coupled with years of drought doesn’t just threaten the quality of life in Atlanta, but the viability of farms, fisheries, and cities and towns in south Alabama and the panhandle of Florida.

Our investigation on water will meander, naturally, but everything will flow back to sustainability and living intentionally. Our first session will be a general overview of water resources and then focus on Alabama’s wealth of rivers and streams. On day two we will explore the concept of water stress, and research regional US strategies for using and conserving water. After we conduct our research we will come together in the first annual ASFA Water Summit where representatives from each region will share best practices for optimizing water use. Our Summit will be highlighted by a visit from Randy Haddock, field director of the Cahaba River Society. Dr. Haddock is going to speak with us about how local activities are adversely affecting the health of the Cahaba River. He will also explain how water conservation ties directly into energy efficiency and sustainability. You heard it here first, “Blue is the new Green.”

You can drown in the amount of information about water. Every federal agency with ties to the environment is turning its attention to water issues. Non-government agencies (NGOs) like the Cahaba River Society and the UN’s World Health Organization have particular interests in water issues. Religious, spiritual, business and recreation groups all have a stake in clean water. Below you find links to several websites related to water and water issues. Don’t surf. Wade on in, the water’s fine.

http://www.weather.gov/ahps/ (NOAA water site)
http://water.usgs.gov/ (usgs water site)
http://www.alabamarivers.org/
http://www.cahabariversociety.org/
http://www.eowilson.org/
http://encyclopediaofalabama.org/face/Article.jsp?id=h-1645 (al water resources)

Water. In the "words" of Miles Davis, "So what?"

Over the past 8 days we have discussed general hydrologic concepts, taken a bird’s eye view of Alabama’s rich aquatic resources, heard about local stresses on the Cahaba River Ecosystem, and researched seven different cites to learn more about their water challenges, their water management practices, and their plans to alleviate future water stresses. So, the question now is, so what? I think that water is THE issue. It is out limiting resource for life, necessary for waste management, and allows for economic growth. I see water issues are taking center stage in local politics, and I think water shortages threaten economic growth in the Southeast.

What do you think? Based on our discussions and our Water Summit, do you think water is an important local, regional, or national issue? Be honest. How will water challenges affect life in the city you researched? Can you envision a national water policy where “water rich” regions share resources with “water poor” regions? What would the water rich regions get in return? Do you think a national water policy is feasible, or sustainable? If so, how? If not, why not? If you don’t think a national water policy is feasible, describe at least three practical changes citizens in “your city” can take to alleviate their water challenges.