It's after Thanksgiving, and we are finally getting to 'The Good Part" of the 2017 film season. The rush at the end of the year is as bad as ever; OK, I'm used to it by now. The one thing that bothered me this weekend was that the Winston Churchill dramatization (Darkest Hour), one of my three must-see movies of the season, was not available to be seen locally this weekend--it had been promised. Maybe it's a new strategy of delayed gratification, but if so, count me as an opponent.
So Far This Year
I've been pretty much absent from the box office, particularly for the big hits. I did see Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 (#3 in 2017 box office) and Lego Batman (#11), sequels I chose to watch based on my appreciation of their predecessors: both were disappointing, mediocre. I caught Wonder Woman (#2) on a plane; it was probably a bit more substantial and entertaining than I expected.
Next, three charting movies that I saw and have to credit--for some intrinsic quality and for the courage to stand up and show themselves before the last month of the year. Blade Runner 2049 (#29) was a reasonably good follow-up to the 1982 cult sci-fi classic. It preserved the look and feel which made the original one special. The plot was excessively convoluted--in that regard, not that different from the first--the special effects lived up to expectations, and (slight spoiler) I was so happy to see Edward Olmos (in a cameo).
Dunkirk (#10) is the real standout from the first 11 months--Christopher Nolan proved himself once again as one who can dramatically realize ambitious action concepts in a way that is pleasing to the public. I don't know about others' impressions, but I didn't see many true surprises, though there were some impressive jolts. I would expect it to be among the top nominated films but not finally a winner of many Oscars. Timing will be a handicap; everyone loved it last summer, but the spotlight has moved on.
There there's Get Out (#12). Satire is my favorite film genre, but I would say it barely qualifies, either for quality of the humor or for that scary, offbeat caricature of reality that the best ones achieve. I would call it a well-made horror film with the usual quota of surprise, which is often enough for success: the one unusual aspect was that it was a splatter film told from a black man's perspective, and thus notable for that difference. It will probably get more recognition than it really deserves.
Other films I would endorse but that didn't do quite so well financially: Wind River (#63), The Zookeeper's Wife (#92), Their Finest (#139), The Florida Project (#130), and the documentary Jane (not ranked, that I could tell). The last of these shows the art of the documentary, putting together nearly-lost clips from Jane Goodall's initial efforts to live with the chimps back in the '60's, along with interviews with her and others some 50 years later. Florida Project turns the Disney ideal on its head with a touching story of kids in a seedy Orlando motel--amateur actors, except for Willem Dafoe's excellent performance as the only true adult on the scene. Their Finest and Zookeeper's Wife are stimulating tales set during World War II, worthy but not much celebrated. Wind River is an under-appreciated film, scenic and well-photographed, a fair portrayal of the intersection of Native America and Capitalist America with strong lead performances by Elizabeth Olsen and Jeremy Renner.
The Big Three
Darkest Hour (Nov. 23?) - For Gary Oldman, a veteran of many and varied roles, this is the chance of a lifetime and he took it seriously. It should be compared to Lincoln; like Daniel Day-Lewis' performance, Oldman has the chance to take this portrayal of a first-tier Great Man and make the character his own. Lincoln won only one Oscar, for Best Actor for the title character, Darkest Hour might have the same result. Regardless, I'm most eager to see it.
The Shape of Water (Dec. 1) - This is Guillermo del Toro's bid to join fellow Mexican directors Inarritu (Birdman, Revenant) and Cuaron (Gravity, Children of Men) atop the field of auteur-superstars. It's a somewhat supernatural tale set in a 1962 research lab. del Toro has done some good films in the past--Pan's Labyrinth was visually interesting, and commercial products Pacific Rim and Hellboy have earned some favorable comment, but this is something different, bigger, and more promising.
Phantom Thread (Dec. 25) - may not end up pleasing very much--it's a romance set in the 1950's, in a context of fashion, none of which is among my sweet spots--but I will see anything starring Daniel Day-Lewis, made by Paul Thomas Anderson, so i guess this will be the one. Could be the one I end up rooting against, but I need to give it a fair viewing.
Out Now or Soon--May or May Not Be Actually Coming Soon to a Theater Near You
The movies coming out in the current time period are the ones where Hollywood is putting out a small bet, in the hopes they can catch fire.
I saw Murder on the Orient Express last night--you should put the Agatha Christie/Hercule Poirot story on the side, either you like such things and you know the outcome or you don't---the main balance is between the scenic pulchritude of the train passing through incredible landscapes (for me, positive), and excessively close and extended views of Kenneth Branagh's overgrown Poirotesque moustache (for me, not so much). It features a monster cast, and I was so happy to see Derek Jacobi in a good role.
I am looking forward to seeing Lady Bird; I've seen a lot of previews and hope the full-length version will contain still more surprise. Last Flag Flying may or may not be a winner (though director Richard Linklater has a good track record), but the featured cast of Lawrence Fishburne/Steve Carell/Bryan Cranston is sure interesting. Call Me By Your Name (Nov. 24?) has a strong critical buzz, an auteurist (Luca Guadagnino) adaptation of a serious (James Ivory) script set in Italy.
Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri and Mudbound are ones I would see in a cinema if I can, but I have my doubts. Three Billboards features Coen Brothers' favorite actress Frances McDormand in a very different kind of role, angry and profane, as she challenges the police's failure to investigate the crime in her family; Mudbound focuses on families, a poor black one and a landowning white one, in pre-segregation Mississippi. Both are getting the "limited engagement" treatment, which will probably be swiftly followed by a move to premium cable. There's I Love You, Daddy, which stars Louis C.K. in a creepy role and was pulled just before its scheduled release when his creepy true-life story came out recently: I presume I will not be seeing that one at all. Woody Allen's Wonder Wheel (Dec.1) has the usual strong cast and a familiar movie setting (old-time Coney Island); could be a little "too Woody", though I am not one of those who will reject the art for the misdeeds of the artist (Roman Polanski's The Pianist permanently cured me of any tendency in that area) Finally, there's Roman J. Israel, Esq. an offbeat Denzel Washington vehicle about a straight, nerdy lawyer whose life goes off the rails.
Squeezing In Later
The P.R. for these late-month partial-release Oscar trickers is just now gearing up. I see a couple of Best Actress nominees coming from these films, briefly noted:
Molly's Game (Dec. 25) has Jessica Chastain (underappreciated in Zookeeper's Wife, above) in a lead role as a real-life woman who hosted huge-money poker games in Vegas and New York , and presumably survived to tell the tale.
Film Stars Don't Die in Liverpool (Dec. 29) - stars Annette Bening in a special role as an aging English star who takes on a younger man, who presumably lives to tell the tale.
Downsizing (Dec. 22) - is a near-future satire along the lines of Honey I Shrunk the Kids or Land of the Giants or Fantastic Voyage, if you recognize those versions (on the comedy/sci-fi spectrum) of people literally getting small, in a relative sense. I saw the preview last night; it looked fun.
All the Money in the World (Dec. 22) is not going to be much fun, but could be meritorious. The true story of the kidnapping of the grandson of the richest man in the (1970's) world, J. Paul Getty, who was incredibly stingy; it could be somewhat grim and/or gruesome. I hope it is not pulled because it has Kevin Spacey as Getty.
Two more full-length documentaries of note, which should make that race interesting:
Eric Clapton: Life in 12 Bars (Nov. 24) --Those are musical time bars, I presume, but they could be the alcoholic ones, too. Clapton's life is quite a roller coaster and some aspects of his autobiography are controversial.
The Rape of Recy Taylor (Dec. 15) --A study of a black woman kidnapped and raped by white males in 1944 Alabama. Very timely.
My last mention is The Post, which combines Steven Spielberg's direction with two of the greatest stars of our times, Meryl Streep and Tom Hanks, to tell the story of the 1971 release of the Pentagon Papers (secret documents about the Vietnam War) by The Washington Post. Streep plays Katharine Graham, publisher of The Post, and Hanks plays Ben Bradlee, the executive editor. I feel that Spotlight, the 2015 Best Picture winner, may have gotten to this subject area (embattled media) first, but the star power is undeniable Oscar bait. This one's timing and content (challenging the state) could be tricky--Mr. Fake News Drumpf may attack it. That could have the double effect of limiting the box office (those three don't really care) and stimulating the resistance juices of the Hollywood voting types. They need a distraction from the sexual harassment stories, which is tarnishing their brand.
Sunday, November 26, 2017
Sunday, November 19, 2017
A Sticky Subject
When i was growing up, other guys would speak admiringly of some miscreants they knew, saying, "He don't give a shit." The idea was that those non-giving individuals were fearless in their transgression, or at least heedless of the consequences of their actions. I tended to avoid those folks, because I did (give a shit). I figured those people would get me in trouble, probably for doing things that I didn't care about and dragging me down with them.
Those shitfull folks (not giving same, not scared shitless) had what I would call a developmental flaw: little or no impulse control. It is not at all uncommon in young people; it usually is something that adults can master, if they choose to do so. One can hope they somehow could have skated through without serious harm, something I was fortunate enough to have done on some occasions--I was/am no angel--but I know that was not the case for many, particularly the ones who imagined that they could do whatever without any regard for those who might object, or who might have been harmed.
Sex Crimes
The current rash of sexual assault/harassment/rape allegations exhibit a peculiar phenomenon in our society: People (so far, all men) whose impulses toward misbehavior have been reinforced by their positions of power, so that they feel immune from the consequences. What they were not immune from, though, was a sickness that made this kind of behavior habitual, with all kinds of plotting, premeditation, and some use of threats to insulate themselves. Such appears to have been the case with Bill Cosby, Bill Clinton, Donald Trump, Harvey Weinstein, Roger Ailes, Bill O'Reilly, Mark Helperin, Louis C.K., Anthony Weiner, and (for me, most tragically) the brilliant actor Kevin Spacey, as well as others still prominent but not household names.
Boys being bad is, unfortunately, a widespread fact of today's life and I would say further, part of the weird mating rituals we have in many societies. What is different in these cases was that these guys' positions of power acted as a deterrent to their victims' normal ability to fend off or respond to unwanted advances; what is different now is that these persons have decided not to suffer in silence anymore. I applaud their courage, and I am somewhat impressed by the broader community's effort to try to change this ugly aspect of the very sticky and complex intersection of sex and power, a discussion that is going who knows where. It is beyond my ability to predict; it is going well beyond the cases of famous people and having effect on all workplaces. I can see some liberation coming out of this, for women and maybe even for men, who may learn to play the mating game more adroitly and less crudely in the future.
The Al Franken case is a bit different: Franken's story is a unique one, as I cannot think of any other comic who has made the transition to an active political career. Comedy generally has a dark side, which makes it more affecting to the emotions, and comedians generally have to find their way to humor through trial and error--some lines work, some don't, and some offend. At the time of Franken's offense against Leann Tweeden, he was a humorist, not yet running for office; the victim of his naughty, harmful pranks was someone who, frankly, was putting herself out as an object of sexual desire (I was unfamiliar with her career; just Google her and you will see). At this point, unless there is some evidence of a more widespread pattern of behavior, I would cite this as an isolated incident of lack of impulse control: this is not to excuse it, he has apologized, he will no doubt be punished (probably more than others, because of his willingness to own up to it), and I think it will limit his career.
What I object to is Donald Trump making judgments on Franken when he has failed to own up to his own behavior, even to the point of refusing even to acknowledge the many complainants or just calling the women liars and mocking them,. It's outrageous, but that's just the norm for this miserable excuse of a human being whom we have mistakenly (and somewhat accidentally) elevated to a position of supreme power.
The Life and Times of Judge Roy Bean-brain
The case of Roy Moore, the Senate candidate from Alabama, is yet another. I denounced this obtuse, hypocritical bigot weeks ago when none of the allegations of borderline pedophilia had yet surfaced. I rejoice that these women have come forward to address the pattern of stalking and groping underage girls which he exhibited (though he has denied the sexual assault aspects, the pattern of searching out, dating, and seeking to seduce the girls is factual); it makes the likelihood of the horror of him serving in the US Senate much less--they have performed a public service.
There is some difference from the pattern of the others' behavior--the events were some forty years ago, he was at most locally famous back then, and it seems as though he may have outgrown that infatuation and borderline criminal behavior. (A 14-year-old is underage, even in Alabama.) He seems to have been faithful to his wife of some 30-plus years, who was 24 when they married. So, I don't oppose his taking office because he's sexually creepy, I oppose him because he's a monster in every regard.
All Eyes on Alabama
Lots of focus on the state that is "the South's South", as John Oliver memorably put it. The U. of Alabama's Crimson Tide football team took its accustomed place at the top of the standings last weekend after a memorable combination of #1 and #3 losing while #2 Alabama squeezed out a narrow road victory over Mississippi St. I couldn't imagine how Georgia could have been rated above any Alabama team when both were undefeated, but that's all over now. Alabama still has tough tasks ahead, including an intra-state showdown vs. Auburn, the team that defeated Georgia, next weekend, but the path to yet another national championship for them is now clear.
The special election in Alabama next month will be the beginning of the midterm battle, with hugely important stakes. To some extent, Moore's race (the election one, not the racial one) mirrors a possible 2020 national election if Trump is still in office and running for re-election. Radical right-wing Republican nominee running against the establishment sector of his own party, and that establishment totally flustered and uncertain how much to oppose him. A plausible but less-known Democrat hoping to benefit from the chaos, in either a two-way or three-way race.
The current race could go in any of several different directions: a Washington Post article lays them out nicely, and ranks them in likelihood. For me, the only acceptable outcome is 2b): the race goes forward, as is, and Moore loses. We must all do what we can--without provoking Alabama voters too much, so that they vote against their interests in a defensive stance against outside interference--to make that happen. I gave to Democrat Doug Jones' campaign long ago; I think the money is flowing in nicely for him and he will run a sane campaign without stooping to the salacious, looking to let Moore flounder and sink in his tar pit.
Make no mistake, the outcome of this race is extremely important. The two-vote Republican margin in the Senate (really, three-vote with Mike Pence remaining as the tiebreaking vote) will be very difficult to overcome in 2018 without this seat. The Democrats really only have two likely candidates to pick up seats in 2018 as things stand today (Arizona and Nevada), and plenty of difficult ones to defend. In this Thanksgiving season, I have to give Turkey-neck Majority Leader McConnell a modicum of credit for coming out strongly against Moore, even at the risk of losing a critical vote for his agenda; it was strategically and morally more important for him to retain something of the high ground on this issue of sexual harassment, and to protect the Republican establishment's interest in defeating this radical upstart.
One cautionary note: I would not put any stock in the polls which show the Democrat Jones leading--there are doubtlessly people who will not admit to pollsters that they will vote for Moore despite what a monster he is (I call this "the David Duke effect"); the unknowns are if there will be a meaningful alternative for those who would prefer not to vote for either Moore or Jones, the extent to which that unknowable effect is present, how many will come home to the Republican as Moore's backers try to counter the perv problem, and how many Republicans just stay home. Clearly, the Republicans start with a large potential majority in this race, but they are squandering it with their unwise choice of a nominee.
Final note; I was preparing a line about how President Trump should use his traditional Thanksgiving ritual of pardoning a turkey for one of his own house turkeys, like Jeff Sessions (who I would say is in serious danger of proceedings against him for lying in public to Senate committees); Jake Tapper got there first with this week's "State of the Union" cartoon on CNN (which he draws himself!). Tapper concluded with the suggestion of Michael Flynn, who was in fact an (undisclosed) lobbyist for the foreign nation with the same name as the animal. Bravo, Jake.
Those shitfull folks (not giving same, not scared shitless) had what I would call a developmental flaw: little or no impulse control. It is not at all uncommon in young people; it usually is something that adults can master, if they choose to do so. One can hope they somehow could have skated through without serious harm, something I was fortunate enough to have done on some occasions--I was/am no angel--but I know that was not the case for many, particularly the ones who imagined that they could do whatever without any regard for those who might object, or who might have been harmed.
Sex Crimes
The current rash of sexual assault/harassment/rape allegations exhibit a peculiar phenomenon in our society: People (so far, all men) whose impulses toward misbehavior have been reinforced by their positions of power, so that they feel immune from the consequences. What they were not immune from, though, was a sickness that made this kind of behavior habitual, with all kinds of plotting, premeditation, and some use of threats to insulate themselves. Such appears to have been the case with Bill Cosby, Bill Clinton, Donald Trump, Harvey Weinstein, Roger Ailes, Bill O'Reilly, Mark Helperin, Louis C.K., Anthony Weiner, and (for me, most tragically) the brilliant actor Kevin Spacey, as well as others still prominent but not household names.
Boys being bad is, unfortunately, a widespread fact of today's life and I would say further, part of the weird mating rituals we have in many societies. What is different in these cases was that these guys' positions of power acted as a deterrent to their victims' normal ability to fend off or respond to unwanted advances; what is different now is that these persons have decided not to suffer in silence anymore. I applaud their courage, and I am somewhat impressed by the broader community's effort to try to change this ugly aspect of the very sticky and complex intersection of sex and power, a discussion that is going who knows where. It is beyond my ability to predict; it is going well beyond the cases of famous people and having effect on all workplaces. I can see some liberation coming out of this, for women and maybe even for men, who may learn to play the mating game more adroitly and less crudely in the future.
The Al Franken case is a bit different: Franken's story is a unique one, as I cannot think of any other comic who has made the transition to an active political career. Comedy generally has a dark side, which makes it more affecting to the emotions, and comedians generally have to find their way to humor through trial and error--some lines work, some don't, and some offend. At the time of Franken's offense against Leann Tweeden, he was a humorist, not yet running for office; the victim of his naughty, harmful pranks was someone who, frankly, was putting herself out as an object of sexual desire (I was unfamiliar with her career; just Google her and you will see). At this point, unless there is some evidence of a more widespread pattern of behavior, I would cite this as an isolated incident of lack of impulse control: this is not to excuse it, he has apologized, he will no doubt be punished (probably more than others, because of his willingness to own up to it), and I think it will limit his career.
What I object to is Donald Trump making judgments on Franken when he has failed to own up to his own behavior, even to the point of refusing even to acknowledge the many complainants or just calling the women liars and mocking them,. It's outrageous, but that's just the norm for this miserable excuse of a human being whom we have mistakenly (and somewhat accidentally) elevated to a position of supreme power.
The Life and Times of Judge Roy Bean-brain
The case of Roy Moore, the Senate candidate from Alabama, is yet another. I denounced this obtuse, hypocritical bigot weeks ago when none of the allegations of borderline pedophilia had yet surfaced. I rejoice that these women have come forward to address the pattern of stalking and groping underage girls which he exhibited (though he has denied the sexual assault aspects, the pattern of searching out, dating, and seeking to seduce the girls is factual); it makes the likelihood of the horror of him serving in the US Senate much less--they have performed a public service.
There is some difference from the pattern of the others' behavior--the events were some forty years ago, he was at most locally famous back then, and it seems as though he may have outgrown that infatuation and borderline criminal behavior. (A 14-year-old is underage, even in Alabama.) He seems to have been faithful to his wife of some 30-plus years, who was 24 when they married. So, I don't oppose his taking office because he's sexually creepy, I oppose him because he's a monster in every regard.
All Eyes on Alabama
Lots of focus on the state that is "the South's South", as John Oliver memorably put it. The U. of Alabama's Crimson Tide football team took its accustomed place at the top of the standings last weekend after a memorable combination of #1 and #3 losing while #2 Alabama squeezed out a narrow road victory over Mississippi St. I couldn't imagine how Georgia could have been rated above any Alabama team when both were undefeated, but that's all over now. Alabama still has tough tasks ahead, including an intra-state showdown vs. Auburn, the team that defeated Georgia, next weekend, but the path to yet another national championship for them is now clear.
The special election in Alabama next month will be the beginning of the midterm battle, with hugely important stakes. To some extent, Moore's race (the election one, not the racial one) mirrors a possible 2020 national election if Trump is still in office and running for re-election. Radical right-wing Republican nominee running against the establishment sector of his own party, and that establishment totally flustered and uncertain how much to oppose him. A plausible but less-known Democrat hoping to benefit from the chaos, in either a two-way or three-way race.
The current race could go in any of several different directions: a Washington Post article lays them out nicely, and ranks them in likelihood. For me, the only acceptable outcome is 2b): the race goes forward, as is, and Moore loses. We must all do what we can--without provoking Alabama voters too much, so that they vote against their interests in a defensive stance against outside interference--to make that happen. I gave to Democrat Doug Jones' campaign long ago; I think the money is flowing in nicely for him and he will run a sane campaign without stooping to the salacious, looking to let Moore flounder and sink in his tar pit.
Make no mistake, the outcome of this race is extremely important. The two-vote Republican margin in the Senate (really, three-vote with Mike Pence remaining as the tiebreaking vote) will be very difficult to overcome in 2018 without this seat. The Democrats really only have two likely candidates to pick up seats in 2018 as things stand today (Arizona and Nevada), and plenty of difficult ones to defend. In this Thanksgiving season, I have to give Turkey-neck Majority Leader McConnell a modicum of credit for coming out strongly against Moore, even at the risk of losing a critical vote for his agenda; it was strategically and morally more important for him to retain something of the high ground on this issue of sexual harassment, and to protect the Republican establishment's interest in defeating this radical upstart.
One cautionary note: I would not put any stock in the polls which show the Democrat Jones leading--there are doubtlessly people who will not admit to pollsters that they will vote for Moore despite what a monster he is (I call this "the David Duke effect"); the unknowns are if there will be a meaningful alternative for those who would prefer not to vote for either Moore or Jones, the extent to which that unknowable effect is present, how many will come home to the Republican as Moore's backers try to counter the perv problem, and how many Republicans just stay home. Clearly, the Republicans start with a large potential majority in this race, but they are squandering it with their unwise choice of a nominee.
Final note; I was preparing a line about how President Trump should use his traditional Thanksgiving ritual of pardoning a turkey for one of his own house turkeys, like Jeff Sessions (who I would say is in serious danger of proceedings against him for lying in public to Senate committees); Jake Tapper got there first with this week's "State of the Union" cartoon on CNN (which he draws himself!). Tapper concluded with the suggestion of Michael Flynn, who was in fact an (undisclosed) lobbyist for the foreign nation with the same name as the animal. Bravo, Jake.
Wednesday, November 08, 2017
Our World? ... The 21st Century Reality (Take 2)
Falling Back
I will celebrate the autumn's gift of an hour (or repayment of the hour loaned in the spring, if you prefer) to provide a high-level view of our current retreat-while-advancing posture in the global community. I will limit the time for writing this screed to one hour, at which time i will need to board a plane.
I would attribute the US’ dominant position to three distinct factors--principal components, in the mathematical terminology. One could cite many others, but I would hold that the others are largely the result of these three.
- Plentiful, Inexpensive, High-Qaulity Labor - America’s development has been boosted throughout its history by a continuous flow of immigrants, many of them imbued with the American Dream of hard work leading to prosperity, others gratefully escaping an unfavorable situation in some other country, and, very significantly, others still (and their descendants) coming unwillingly into servitude here and being forced to work for little or no compensation. All three have produced value beyond the cost of their effort, which has often been reinvested, building up the nation’s store of capital. I would add one more source of low-cost labor, the conscription of men into our military services, principally in time of war--more about this later.
- Free Institutions and Associations - I think this is the area for which Americans can justifiably feel proud and somewhat exceptional. I don’t mean free in the sense of low- or no-cost as in 1), but freedom: Voluntary participation, active involvement without excessive coercion or regulation, and, in the case of government, gradually progressing access to government services, meritocratic employment, and participation in the electoral process. Though we are not a particularly cultured society, this freedom has produced remarkable achievements in the arts, in science, in higher education, in inventions which have improved the quality of life worldwide, and enhanced the aura of that Dream mentioned in 1). Factors 1) and 2) have combined to produce a military force--now even without the involuntary servitude of the draft-- which, in this era, no nation would dare to challenge in open conflict.
- Bountiful Resources - Herein the great treasure and fortune of living in this beautiful land. Thanks to the light touch of the inhabitants prior to the establishment of the nation, the Native Americans and--to some extent--Hispanics who have been massacred, worked to death, infected, hunted down, expropriated, crowded out, and otherwise dispossessed, today's Americans inherit a land with huge mineral resources, including abundant fertile land, water, natural plant and animal life. We can enjoy these 'gifts", along with a climate that is generally favorable, and the fruits of factors 1) and 2) applied to 3), but the manner of the acquisition of this bounty should give us some pause from being overly proud, and we should feel responsible to be good caretakers of this part of our heritage and leave something for those who follow us here.
So, let’s take a reading on these three elements which together have Made America Great--their current status, their trend, and the outlook, short-term and long-term for them to persist. (32 minutes)
With regard to 3), I am cautiously optimistic: If we are mindful, we can preserve the immense agricultural capacity, the abundance of freshwater (think of the Great Lakes, or our great rivers), while preserving more of our remaining fossil fuels through expanded use of plentiful, naturally renewable sources of energy. Certainly our current national government provides daily setbacks for this objective, with its aversion to environmental protection and eagerness to defy the trends toward conservation which have prevailed in the past few decades; however, even eight full years of Drumpfication (to think the unthinkable, near worst-case scenario) should not be sufficient to irreparably destroy our favorable initial condition in this area.
By contrast, I am very worried about 2). The Trump Administration is highly corrosive to all these civilized virtues, and his personal, malign influence is causing great harm from which we will not easily recover. In particular, he is putting every institution of government (with the possible exception of the military, at least so far) in disrepute, either through his aspersions, his cynical appointments, or his misuse of the levers of power. I am speaking of the trashing of various executive branch departments, the lack of respect for the legislative and judicial branches, his attempts to undermine voting rights, the abuse of the free press, and his blatantly venal and dishonest approach toward government by and for the benefit of the wealthy. It is shocking that he and his kind have sought to turn public opinion against our world-class universities; the fraudulent Republican tax plan includes a proposal to tax the endowments of these non-profit (private) institutions, something which would reduce opportunity for the underprivileged and endanger our status as a world leader in research.
And I am afraid that those of us who have not kowtowed or been duped by the spurious appeal of the Drumpfenreich have not so far been sufficiently united, forceful, and effective in our opposition. Responsibility for our failure which occurred in 2016 lies on those who voted for Trump, but the remedy lies, in part, with those who did not (and on those who can rouse themselves from their torpor, stupor, or other forms of mental inactivity which caused them to support him in the first place). (47 minutes)
Which brings us to 1)--will our supply of plentiful, inexpensive, high-quality labor persist? And, does our persistence in the top rank of nations require it? I have my doubts about the latter, and I see the Trump Administration’s effect to be adverse to a favorable answer to the former. The negative consequences of a sustained campaign to reduce both legal immigration and the ability of those undocumented who would wish to stay here and contribute could be serious for our economy, but they would be more severe if it were not the case that ruthless re-engineering and progressive automation were reducing the demand for labor. My conclusion is that this is very much an open question, and one that will probably not be resolved when the Wherever Man slinks off to his eternal reward (most certainly infamy, damnation if there is a just God). (52 minutes).
I am something of an optimistic--generally a step back for America has been followed, eventually, by two steps forward. Right now, though, in stepping backward we have made an awkward stumble, and there is the danger we may fall--hard.
On the Good Foot
Speaking of the Gang of Four (..."two steps forward--six steps back, six steps back", from their song "At Home He Feels Like a Tourist"), this leaves me only eight minutes to mention the nation that shows the ability to Spring Forward (to complete the allusion). China has emerged from a disastrous century or so of exploitation, civil war, invasion, and strife primarily through its exercise of factor 1), along with some steadily improving capability for central planning--something I would definitely not credit our country with having. Like America has, the Chinese have a strong sense of their identity and belief in their nation's "manifest destinay" of greatness (in their case, fully justified by millennia of history). Despite the absence of factor 2), and with a somewhat negative stance toward the conservation of its resources, China’s current administration has been able to produce continued economic expansion, combined with a determined approach to combatting the most serious forms of official corruption, and a newfound will to exert itself more powerfully on the global stage.
I visited Shanghai last month, for the first time in nearly 20 years. My colleagues there asked me, what was different? My answer, it’s just so much more of the same. That city is just enormous; it’s big and bold and modern, and it goes on endlessly. Every day, we had the “China Daily” in our breakfast room--we called it the “Daily Propaganda”; it is published by the Communist Party, in English. Yes, it was propaganda, but not filled with lies, only self-serving interpretation of the news. The Communist Party was having its major party congress during that time; Xi Jinping was re-elected as President for another five years, and the question is whether he will give up power vountarily after his second term, following the practice of the last couple decades. It is a question comparable to the one American presidents faced historically (before FDR and the Constitutional amendment which followed that now prevents its consideration). Xi is aiming for his legacy to be the #3 of the triad of national party heroes, after Mao and Deng Hsiao-ping. Chou En-lai is still remembered well, as someone who maintained some degree of humanity among the brutal power struggles of the early Communist state. I think people are interested in freedom, as it relates to their personal lives, but basically have little interest in participating politically.
The modern culture that has developed in the past 20 years looks a lot to me like Hong Kong's, but without the free association. It is highly materialistic; shopping is very big, housing is an absolute prerequisite, and there is plenty of (carefully-monitored) pop culture, use of smartphones and the Internet. Social media and browsing have been limited to domestic, vetted sites. One difference is cars: China has followed American culture in going whole-hog for them, preferably big and--surprisingly--American. One positive development encouraged by the government is rapid expansion of electric cars--if you are having trouble getting your Tesla delivered, it's probably because Chinese people are paying more for them and therefore rate higher on the prioritization table.
I had a record number of corrections and edits to make after posting this the first time (including the last paragraph, for which I ran out of time to write the first time). I have decided to re-post it for those who suffered through version 1, and I add my apologies to them--I will not repeat that experiment. I will now delete the first take, as being unworthy.
The modern culture that has developed in the past 20 years looks a lot to me like Hong Kong's, but without the free association. It is highly materialistic; shopping is very big, housing is an absolute prerequisite, and there is plenty of (carefully-monitored) pop culture, use of smartphones and the Internet. Social media and browsing have been limited to domestic, vetted sites. One difference is cars: China has followed American culture in going whole-hog for them, preferably big and--surprisingly--American. One positive development encouraged by the government is rapid expansion of electric cars--if you are having trouble getting your Tesla delivered, it's probably because Chinese people are paying more for them and therefore rate higher on the prioritization table.
I had a record number of corrections and edits to make after posting this the first time (including the last paragraph, for which I ran out of time to write the first time). I have decided to re-post it for those who suffered through version 1, and I add my apologies to them--I will not repeat that experiment. I will now delete the first take, as being unworthy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
