Libraries And Schools Are Targets In GOP War Against Truth

First Anchorage mayor Dave Bronson appointed a library director who didn't meet the minimum qualifications of the job description - a masters in library science and some years experience working in libraries.    When the Assembly didn't approve her, he appointed a second unqualified head librarian who isn't likely to be approved. (Or maybe they've already voted her down, there's so much nonsense going on it's hard to keep all the details straight. I can't find proof one way or the other.)

So now he's reorganizing the city through his budget which, according to Cheryl Lovegreen would  put the library into the Department of Parks and Recreation which changes the head librarian to a position that doesn't need Assembly approval. 

In an earlier post I pointed out that these actions are deliberate and that the GOP is pushing library takeovers around the country.  

I don't know how much of this Mayor Bronson consciously understands and how much he is just following the party instructions supported by the various national anti-think tanks and those organizations set up to get ideologically driven legislation passed at the state and local level.  

In the earlier post on taking over libraries, I'd found that a key goal is to purge libraries of books about race, about the history of race relations, that discuss diversity in a positive way.  It's part of the anti critical race campaign.  Mustn't allow people access to alternatives to the sacred myths of US exceptionalism.  

All of this is about lying on a pretty spectacular scale.  Lying as a form of keeping the masses ignorant, as a way to make them believe in an alternative reality.  It's how you create a cult of followers who deny what's in front of their own eyes and accept what their leader tells them.  

What's this got to do with libraries?   Lying isn't new to politics. 

"Secrecy - what diplomatically is called discretion," as well as the arcana imperil, the mysteries of government - and deception,  the deliberate falsehood and the outright lie, used as legitimate means to achieve political ends have been with us since the beginning of recorded history. Truthfulness has never been counted among the political virtues, and lies have always been regarded as justifiable tools in political dealings.

--Hannah Arendt (1971) “Lying in Politics: Reflections on The Pentagon Papers”, 

The Trump presidency took lying to a new level, at least in the US.   Journalists kept tab of how many lies he told in a day.  Twitter made it easier to track. And people are saying things like, "the lying was the point." But it's more than that.  Politicians have always lied about their opponents so they could take over their jobs.

Now it's a frontal attack on truth itself.  The constant denial of truth and the ways we evaluate and measure what is true, is intended to destroy people's confidence in education and in science.   It's an attack to take over as the arbiter of what is true.

If we look at the evolution of intentional lying in the modern United States, of well funded and scientifically based (science was used to determine the best ways to convince people, not to seek the truth) campaigns, we see things like the tobacco industry's decades long campaign to convince the US public that smoking was not bad for your health (for example here and here.) and the oil industry's campaigns denying climate change.  Both industries knew they were lying.  We see it again today with COVID.  People earn lots of money packaging and selling lies. These are just the big ones that have been exposed. There are thousands of lesser ones to get people to by 'health food' or to lose weight and on and on and on.  

But counting the lies and offering scientific evidence that 'prove' the inconsistencies are all besides the point.  The new GOP is now about obliterating truth.  By creating false realities, they can challenge science itself.  Trump may or may not believe he really won the election. (I tend to think he knows the truth, but he's also enough of a narcissist that he maybe can't imagine he didn't win.  I don't know.)  By still challenging the election, he cultivates the doubts of his supporters, and hopes to harvest their votes in the future. And to cast doubt on the legitimacy of any election he loses.

They have to lie and to eradicate any kind of objective truth because the truth does them no favors.  The US Justice system has huge flaws that favor the wealthy and the white and delivers injustice to the poor and the people of color.  But they have to maintain the facade that it is fair, at least when it punishes the poor and not-so white.  The economic system now takes from the poor and gives to the rich through systemic laws and rules that make it hard, if not dangerous, for workers to unite for better pay and better working conditions.  Their unions that fought for 40 hour weeks and vacations and overtime pay and fair grievance procedures have been gutted.  But they must maintain the fiction that if you work hard and honestly you'll do well.  

The elimination of any sort of verifiable truth gives the GOP the possibility of splitting the population and continuing to get many to vote against their own self interest.  They do this by creating an emotional self interest based on race, religion, abortion, immigration.  It's built on a quarter truth and three quarters lies. (No, I have not measured the truth ratios.  Think about this metaphorically.)

Thus They Want To Gut Libraries And Schools

So, if elimination of truth and the ability to evaluate what is true is the GOP goal, then it makes perfect sense for them to go after libraries and schools - all levels - and to go after libraries.  Because these are institutions that give average people access to the truth.  And access to alternative truths and to logic and science.  

Our governor's drastic cuts to the University of Alaska are a similar effort to destroy public universities.  I also believe that schools are prime targets of private takeovers.  But that idea distracted me from recognizing the other, larger,  goal - obfuscating truth.  

Viktor Klemperer (cousin of conductor Otto Klemperer) was a distinguished university professor and WW I veteran when Hitler came to power.  Klemperer kept a diary during WWII - I Will Bear Witness in two volumes - where, among other observations,  he kept notes on the language used by the Nazis in their speeches and in the news.  This later resulted in The Language of the Third Reich: A Philologist's Notebook.

These books are careful studies of how the Nazis manipulated language to hide truths they didn't want the German people to hear and to believe the truths the Nazis wanted them to believe.  

Good lesson for citizens of the United States to learn.  

And since I brought Nazis into the discussion, I had found the GOP's embrace of White Supremacists AND their flipping this completely by crying that they are victims of Nazi like suppression of liberties (for having to wear masks, for example) pretty bizarre.  

But on reflection, it's part of obliterating any kind of objective truth.  We are Nazis and we are the victim of Nazis.  Consistency and truth broken, leaving logical thinkers sputtering in disbelief.  That is the point.  To capture truth and make it their own way to rule the world.  

A Little Hannah Arendt For Labor Day

 "With the term vita active, I propose to designate three fundamental human activities:  labor, work, and action.  They are fundamental because each corresponds to one of the
basic conditions under which life on earth has been given to man.

Labor is the activity which corresponds to the biological process of the human body, who's spontaneous growth, metabolism, and eventually decay are bound to the vital necessities  produced and fed into the life process by labor.  The human condition of labor is life itself.

Work is the activity which corresponds to the unnaturalness of human existence, which is not imbedded in, and whose mortality is not compensated by, the species' ever-recurring life cycle.  Work provides an "artificial" world of things, distinctly different from all natural surroundings.  Wthin its borders each imdividual life is housed, which this world itself is meant to outlast and transcend them all.  The human condition of work is wordliness.

Action, the only activity that goes on directly between men without the intermediary of things or matter, corresponds to the human condition of plurality, to the fact that men, not Man, live on the earth and inhabit the world.  While all aspects of the human condition are somehow related to politics, this plurality is specifically the condition - not only the conditio sine qua non, but the  conditio per quam -  of all political life.  Thus the language of the Romans, perhaps the most political people we have known, used the words "to live" and "to be among men" (inter homines esse) or "to die" and "to cease to be among men" (inter homines esse desinere) as synonyms."

Later, she elaborates on the distinction between labor and work.

"THE LABOUR OF OUR BODY AND THE WORK OF OUR HANDS"

"The distinction btween labor and work which I propose is unusual.  The phenomenal evidence in its favor is too striking to be ignored, and yet historically it is a fact that apart from a few scattered remarks, which moreover were never developed even in the theories of their authors, there's is hardly anything in either the pre-modern tradition of political thought or in the large boy of modern labor theories to support it.  Against this scarcity of historical evidence, however, stands one very articulate and obstinate testimony, namel, the simple fact that every European language, ancient and modern, contains two etymologically unrelated word for what we have to come to think of as the same activity, and rtains them in the face of their persistent synonymous usage."

"Thus Locke's distinction between working hands and a labouring body is somewhat reminiscent of the ancient Gree distinction between the cheirotechnēs, the craftsman, to whom the German Handwerker corresponds, and those who, like "slaves and tame animals with their bodies minister to the necessities of life," . . .

I thought I would find an easy passage from Hannah Arendt's The Human Condition that would clearly distinguish between work and labor on this Labor Day.  But I forgot that Arendt makes my blog posts seem like extremely shallow tweets. But it seemed to be a fitting thought exercise for Labor Day.  

To Impeach Now Or Not - Stepping Back To Understand The Debate A Little Differently

I've written on the topic before, but this time I want to consider the motivation of people (Democrats) who differ because some want to start impeachment right now and others say that its futile if the Senate votes it down.  I'm just thinking out loud here.  So bear with me as I wander into a little philosophy.

Philosophers talk about deontology and utilitarianism.  From Gabriela Guzman:

Deontological ethics is an ethics system that judges whether an action is right or wrong based on a moral code. Consequences of those actions are not taken into consideration. This ethics system is intended to be precise and by the book. Doing the right thing means to follow proper rules of behavior and, by doing so, promoting fairness and equality. . . (emphasis added)

In the other hand, utilitarian ethics state that a course of action should be taken by considering the most positive outcome. This ethics system is more accurate when it comes to addressing complicated situations, which solutions are not as trivial.

[This is a very brief pair of definitions.  For more nuance, check out the link above, or find other sites that discuss it.]

 Roughly, using this way of seeing the debate, one could argue that those calling for impeachment now - because they see the president as having committed high crimes, misdemeanors, and treason - is the right thing to do.  It doesn't matter whether the Senate votes for impeachment.  Doing the right thing is what is important.  The law/constitution was broken, so action must be taken.  At the extreme case would be the swimming referee in Anchorage who disqualified a female swimmer because the rules required the butt cheeks to be covered.

And those calling for a careful calculation of how this is going to play out in the Senate before impeaching, could be seen as utilitarians.  What's the point, they'd say, of the House voting to impeach, if the Senate does[n't] vote to convict?

But, of course, life doesn't settle into neatly articulated categories.  One could argue that demanding impeachment hearings start now, is the best strategy  to get rid of the president - either via impeachment of the 2020 election. Impeachment hearings give the House the power to investigate the president's actions, to get documents, tapes, and to compel witnesses to testify.  That process itself, they would argue, could lead to revelations that would swing enough Republican Senators to obtain a successful conviction in the Senate.  And, even if that doesn't happen, it could reveal enough to help Democrats take the presidency in 2020.  Which would put those folks into the utilitarian camp.

Rep. Pelosi, who clearly represents the chief utilitarian in the original scenario, would argue that getting rid of Trump and restoring the US to a nation of law, is the ultimate goal.  If we go the impeachment route, we need to win, not make a show of ideologically pure failure.

As I think about this, I'd say Rep. Pelosi fits fairly neatly into the utilitarian box.  But I suspect the impeach now faction is made up of folks who are clearly deontologists and also utilitarians, who see impeaching now as the path to the best overall outcome.  And some may feel that impeaching now is both the right thing to do and the most likely path to accomplish their goals.

These splits among people who ostensibly hold the same political beliefs (or religious beliefs) is not uncommon.  Humans probably line up somewhere on a continuum from Deontology to Utilitarianism.  Those on the ends of the scales aren't likely to budge.

A Serious Life And The Two Horses Of Genghis Kahn

I met Michael Sidney Welch a number of years ago when I taught a class at Olé on blogging.  I insisted that we have it in a computer lab and that everyone would get their own blog in the several weeks we met.  My expertise was just my own blogging experience, but I knew if I just talked and they didn't try it out themselves, it would be really boring.

Just about everyone - I think there were about 20 folks - got a blog up and several have kept those blogs going or got new ones up after that.

Michael is a philosopher.  I see him around town, usually he's with his wife, particularly at the Anchorage International Film Festival.  Recently his wife invited us to a group I can best describe as a movie club.  I mean that in the sense of a book club that watches movies rather than reads books.

This week we met to see "The Two Horses of Genghis Kahn" - a really beautiful Mongolian movie about a woman who travels around Inner and Outer Mongolia in search of the lost lyrics of a song her grandmother taught her.  She knows some of them, but there were more inscribed in a horse head violin that was destroyed during the Cultural Revolution.  She still had the broken off horse head and sought someone to make a new violin for it while she went searching elders for the missing words.

The broad landscapes and the search for lost culture are familiar to Alaskans and it provoked a lot of discussion about cultural change, both natural and. . .   I'm sitting here thinking about the right word and I'm not succeeding - unnatural isn't right.  Forced comes to mind - as when one culture tries to wipeout another culture by banning the language and music and other ways the culture is transmitted from generation to generation.  And we could talk a long time by what 'natural' cultural change entails.  We talked about how younger generations live in different worlds than their parents' generation.  But is this really natural?  Or is it a product of the industrial revolution that fosters so much rapid change in the last few centuries?

I haven't found any serious reviews, but this one gives an introduction to the film and the director.
Anchorage's Loussac Library has a copy. Youtube has a tease that looks like the whole copy from Netflix, but it doesn't seem to be so.  It apparently has been on Netflix (couldn't find it today) and may be on Prime.   It has a much slower pace than US viewers are used to.  Here's a preview, though we watched it in the original (which I assume was Mongolian, but may have been a dialect) with English subtitles.



As we were leaving Michael told me he has his newish blog - A Serious Life - up now.  When I say he's a philosopher, I'm not joking.  This is not for the Tweet at Heart.  I'll also link it in the right column, since some of the bloggers I've had there have been, shall we say, preoccupied with other things than their blogs.

For those who make it this far, the title of the movie is also the title of the song Uma is seeking.

Some Things I Want To Write About

Our political situation is getting grim.

Democracy works slowly.  I feel like I'm watching a car careening toward a cliff in very slow motion.  We know something has to be done.  Democratic wheels grind slowly though.  And with the added alignment of the House, Senate, and White House, they grind even more slowly.
We're watching disaster happen before our eyes yet it feels like there is nothing we can do about it.  In the short term, for most of us, that's probably true.  This car is going to go over the cliff.  There's going to be a lot of damage.

What we can do is:

• let the people with power (members of Congress, member of government agencies, people who have influence on members of Congress) know how we feel
• be models of good human action - take care of ourselves, do work that makes the world better, treat others with respect and decency
• prepare for the 2018 election.  

But much of our crisis is due to radically different views about how the world works, how people behave, how we 'know' what is good and bad.  It's stuff inside people's brains.

A longer term project is to examine what goes on in the human brain and pursue understandings such as:

• Our understanding of human economics
• the Protestant Ethic and the nature of work
• why work is the basis upon which Americans believe wealth should be distributed?
• as science leads to more automation that replaces more human workers, what happens to the people displaced by machines?
• are there other moral and equitable ways to distribute wealth among human beings?
• Our understanding of human behavior
• why do people do what they do?
• the role of genes
• the role of the environment 
• the role of belief systems, different ideas of morality
• the roles of fear, of hope
• what affects how people behave collectively - in families, communities, in political bodies?
• Our understanding of government and its relationship with individuals and private organizations
• government as a concept
• government as actual human systems
• conditions where they work well
• conditions where they don't work well
• roles of governments and roles of private sector organizations
• Our understanding of how we know things, how to think, how to solve problems
• the roles of family, community, religion, schools, media, culture
• the roles of individual brains
• the role of emotions
• how people change their understanding of things

There are a number of collective projects that the people of the United States need to undertake.  (I'll limit myself at this point, but really, this is project the peoples of the world need to engage in.)

• We need to carry on with the fundamental tasks that allow us all to eat, have shelter, education, health care.  (And as I write this, I'm fully aware that all those needs are not being fulfilled for 'us all.')
• We need to work on alleviating the fear we have of each other - whether 'the other' is defined in terms of skin tone, gender, religious beliefs, occupation, birthplace, sexual orientation, or any defined outsider from the mental category in which we each see ourselves.  
• We need to understand ourselves and where our values come from and where our beliefs about how the world works come from.  (Is our knowledge based on what authorities in our lives tell us is so?  Is it based on our own experience?  Is it based on our feelings about things?  Is it based on any sort of rigorous testing of the world itself?)
• Then we need to compare how we know the world with how others know the world and figure out how to resolve differences.

As you can see, there's a lot to think about, talk about, and do.  A blog may not be the best medium to explore these things.  Or maybe I can figure out how to make it work on a blog.  In a sense I do touch on these things frequently.  But can I do it in a more organized way?  Or are blog posts by necessity too short to take on such complicated and interrelated questions?  

That's where my head is today as our house guest of the last few days headed for the airport and the sun has been out for one of the nicest days of the year so far.  

Being human.  That's a big challenge.  How do we do it while achieving a reasonable level of contentment and doing as little harm to others as possible?  

Rereading this, it sounds so heavy and dry.  But these are some of the fundamental issues that humans must engage to overcome our differences and to find alternative ways to live decently on this planet.  I'll use this as a first draft and guideline.  Maybe I can find ways to engage these topics that are lighter without sacrificing depth.  

What Are Your Ethical Responsibilities To Your Pets?

Next Tuesday evening, you can find out:

The UAA Ethics Center and Philosophy Department is please to welcome philosopher, Prof. Gary Varner, Texas A & M to campus for a free, public symposium.  Prof. Varner who will be speaking on 

Pets, Companion Animals, and Domesticated Partners: Ethics and Animal Companions on 

April 18th 

between 6-8 pm in Library 307.  

Abstract: Prof. Varner is author of Personhood, Ethics, and Animal Cognition: Situating Animals in Hare's Two Level Utilitarianism (Oxford University Press, 2012).  In this presentation, he will introduce stipulative definitions of terms "companion animal," "domesticated partners," and "mere pet."  He will argue that the institution of pet-keeping is justifiable, but that the justification is stronger for companion animals than for mere pets, and that it is stronger for domesticated partners.

Afternoon At Elliott Bay Book Company - Scary Old Sex, The Life You Can Save, And More

While in Seattle this last time, I got the pleasure of browsing the shelves at the Elliot Bay Book Company on Capitol Hill.  Here are some books to munch on.  I hope this reminds folks that there is more to do than follow Tweets about politics,

Alec Ross - Industries of the Future


You can watch Ross talk about this book at this Ted Talk presentation.  He talks about growing up in West Virginia and teaching in West Baltimore.  He thinks the kids he saw in those place are no less intelligent than kids anywhere.  Those kids didn't fail, the system did.

Premise of the book:  If the last 20 years were shaped by the rise of digitization and the internet, if that's what produced the jobs and wealth, what's next?
The book, he says, mentions a number, but in this talk he flags three.

1. Big data analytics - land was the raw material of the agricultural age, iron of the industrial age, and data is the raw material of the information age.  Background in data analytics will get you employment for the next 20 years or so.  
2. Cyber security - just an associate degree will get you a job starting at $60,000, with college degree, $90,000.
3. Genomics - The world's next trillion dollar industry will be created by our genetic code.  

Question is:  How inclusive will these industries be?  San Jose, for instance, has 4000 homeless people.
How to compete and succeed in tomorrow's world.

Three things we can do now for your kids:

1. Do not rely on the systems to save you.  Because the system fails kids.  Create your own system to save the kids.  
2. Make sure your kids learn languages - foreign languages and computer languages.  
3. Be a life long learner yourself.  

Loss of hope and loss of opportunity is fatal.

The video fills in a lot more background.  I've just given you the barest outline.

[If I do all of these in this much detail, I'll be up way past my bedtime.  I've already decided to do this in two parts.  Each one of these is worthy of a post of its own.  But the point is to just give you a quick look at these titles, like you were browsing in the book store.]

Ngugi Wa Thiong'o - In The House Of The Interpreter

Margaret Busby, reviewing this book in the Independent writes:

"From the first pages of In the House of the Interpreter, strong and memorable themes emerge: the power of education, the rootedness of kin, the need to transform the colonialist narrative. "How could a whole village, its people, history, everything, vanish, just like that?"

This memoir takes place in 1950s Kenya as the Mau Mau are fighting for independence from the British and Ngugi is going to a school.

"Alliance High School is a sanctuary. It is an elitist establishment – the first secondary school for Africans in the country – founded by a coalition of Protestant churches and initially shaped by American charitable funding that aimed at turning out 'civic-minded blacks who would work within the parameters of the existing racial state'".

Arlene Heyman - Scary Old Sex

From a New Yorker review:

"Consider a character like the retired doctor in the story “Nothing Human,” a grandmother three times over, who takes the opportunity of a cruise-ship vacation to berate her husband for his squeamishness: “We can’t try anal intercourse because you think I’m filled with shit to the brim. You have no sense of anatomy. I can take an enema! You can use a condom!” She knows she’s being less than fair. It’s the middle of the night, and he’s half asleep; she picked a fight over his not washing his hands as he groped his way back from the cabin bathroom, and now she’s turned to nagging to cover her deeper anxieties about the relationship. Was he in there to masturbate, when they haven’t had sex since the start of the cruise? When they got together a decade ago, after her first husband’s death, they couldn’t keep their hands off each other. She misses that, and she misses her first husband, too. But she’s too wise to indulge in nostalgia. When she dreams occasionally of her first husband, it’s in a detached, friendly way—'like a little visit.'”

This is a description of one of the short stories in this book, stories about older women and sex.  The author, Anne Heyman, is a psychoanalyst in her 70s.  To prove that so called sophisticated magazines like the New Yorker aren't any different from other media, the reviewer spends most of the review on literary gossip about Heyman's early affair with a much older famous author and how that affair is treated in different works of fiction.

Peter Singer - The Life You Can Save 

Singer is a prolific and well known philosopher.  You can actually read this book online here.   In the Preface, he writes about this book:

"I have been thinking and writing for more than thirty years about how we should respond to hunger and poverty.  I have presented this book's arguments to thousands of students in my university classes and in lectures around the world, and to countless others in newspapers, magazines, and television programs.  As a result, I've been forced to respond to a wide range of thoughtful challenges.  This book represents my effort to distill what I've learned about why we give, or don't give, and what we should do a out it."

Ken Liu - The Paper Menagerie


I pulled this book off the shelf because Liu is the translator for the Chinese science fiction book, Three Body Problem.

Amal El-Mothar writes about the book for NPR:

"Ken Liu's The Paper Menagerie and Other Stories is a book from which I staggered away, dazed, unable to speak. I have wrestled with how to review it, circled my metaphors like a wary cat, and finally abandoned the enterprise of trying to live up to its accomplishment. I will be honest, and blunt, because this is a book that has scoured me of language and insight and left itself rattling around inside the shell of me."

No wonder he was asked to translate The Three Body Problem.






Neil Gaiman - The View From The Cheap Seats




I know Gaiman from the graphic novel Sandman, a gift from my son.  This is a collection of non-fiction essays.  Kirkus Review writes:

"Gaiman (Trigger Warning: Short Fictions and Disturbances, 2015, etc.) is a fan. Of course, as a writer, he’s created unforgettable worlds and characters, but in this collection of essays, introductions, speeches, and other nonfiction works, it’s his fan side that comes through most strongly. The author writes about the thrill of discovering a piece of art that feels like it was made just for you; the way certain books or songs seem to slot into a place in your heart you didn’t know was there; the way a text can mean different things at different times in your life. If the idea of going on a long, rambling walk with Gaiman and asking him about his influences sounds appealing, this is the book for you."

Jason Heller offers a longer review at NPR.

Charles Johnson - The Way Of The Writer

From a short review in the NY Times:

"Johnson’s book, the record of a single year’s email correspondence with his friend E. Ethelbert Miller, is a piecemeal meditation on the daily routines and mental habits of a writer. Johnson describes his study’s curated clutter, his nocturnal working rhythms and the intense labor of his revisions, alongside a careful outline of a theory, reminiscent of both Aristotle and Henry James, of how plots emerge from a “ground situation.” There is a winning sanity here: Johnson wants his students to be “raconteurs always ready to tell an engaging tale,” not self-preoccupied."

As I read some of this book in the bookstore, it was one I knew I needed to get back to.


I've got another bunch of images of books from that afternoon which I'll try to get up before too long.

“Without exception, totalitarian states invariably reject knowledge in the humanities, and states that reject such knowledge always become totalitarian.”

That's from an editorial in the Japan Times as reported in ICEF Monitor, in reaction to the Japanese government's call for

"universities to close social sciences and humanities faculties." 

According to the article,

"Higher education policy in Japan is now reportedly determined via the President’s Council on Industrial Competitiveness, a special body composed of government ministers, business executives, and (two) academics. And it appears that the Minister’s June letter to universities emerged from deliberations within that group and, more fundamentally, from the President’s conviction that Japan’s higher education institutions should be more directly focused on the country’s labour market needs." 

(Another factor in this debate is the decline of the student age population in Japan which means there are fewer applications to universities.  The article also mentions a threat of loss of funds from the government to universities that don't comply.)


This is happening in the US as well and which we see here in Alaska.  As I reported in a series of posts on the selection of the University of Alaska president this year, our Board of Regents has become populated with mostly corporate executive types.

And the University of Alaska Fairbanks is shutting down the philosophy department and others.  Budget cuts give good cover for making such moves. "We wish it was not necessary to reduce the number of programs we offer, but our state budget scenario leaves us few choices."  Of course, Alaska's legislature, like many others, is under constant anti-government and budget cutting pressure from right wing lobbyist organizations based on so called 'think tank' studies.  But that's another story.  (The Anchorage International Film Festival had a documentary, The Brainwashing of my Dad, which chronicles how the right is pumping out this sort of propaganda, that eventually leads to this sort of regretful, handwringing apology for shutting down such programs.)

I recall when the Masters of Public Administration (MPA) program worked with its advisory committee - made up of active executives in state, federal, local, military, and non-profit organizations - the faculty were surprised by the outcome.  While our existing program emphasized thinking and problem solving skills, our then existing objectives focused on practical management skills such as human resources, budgeting, supervisory, and planning, and public involvement skills.  But our advisory board was more interested in students who could think, solve problems, were flexible, and could deal with ethical dilemmas, than it was with a mechanical understanding of the budgeting process or personnel rules.  And so we adjusted our program learning objectives to reflect those processes we taught already, but hadn't explicitly identified in our learning objectives.

And apparently this is the case too among key Japanese business leaders.  Again from the ICEF Monitor article:

"The powerful business lobby group Keidanren was also quick to respond to the government’s assertion that the business community only requires people with practical skills. “Some media reported that the business community is seeking work-ready human resources, not students in the humanities, but that is not the case,” said Keidanren Chairman Sadayuki Sakakibara. He added that Japanese companies desire “exactly the opposite” – that is, students who can solve problems based on “ideas encompassing the different fields” of science and humanities."

 And in the US, while some universities are shutting down humanities programs to focus on vocational preparation, the US military academy, West Point, isn't. Brigadier General Timothy Trainor, West Point’s academic dean:

“It’s important to develop in young people the ability to think broadly, to operate in the context of other societies and become agile and adaptive thinkers,” Trainor said. “What you’re trying to do is teach them to deal with complexity, diversity, and change. They’re having to deal with people from other cultures. They have to think very intuitively to solve problems on the ground.”

That's more or less what our advisors were saying in the MPA program back in the 1990's.

There's a lot more to say on this.  Is this just the task-oriented types narrowly trying to eliminate what they see as useless philosophizing wasteful programs, or are these more calculated attempts to stop universities from teaching students to think?  Which harkens back to the quote on totalitarianism in the title.  But my job here in LA is to clean out my mom's house and play with my granddaughter for the few more days she's here.  So consider this post, like many posts, just notes on the human condition and how we know what we know.

[Sorry for those seeing this reposted - Feedburner problems again.] [And the reposting got it onto other blog rolls in three minutes this time. The original post had not gotten picked up after several hours.]

Famous People Born 1915: It Was A Very Good Year 2

I'm going to send you to the original post here  that has video and pictures and a list of 37 folks who were born in 1915 and made names for themselves. I'm afraid the coding for the table was too big for Feedburner to send it to other blogrolls. I tried to make it simpler but after redoing the chart, I did something that screwed up all the formatting.

Image from here.

 This post gives me a chance to add a few pictures and a video that weren't in the original as a teaser.

This quote from Alan Watts (born Jan 6, 1915) seems an appropriate one for a post like this.

Image from Wouk website

And novelist Herman Wouk, born May 27, 1915 and one of three on the list who are still alive.














Or this short video of Anthony Quinn (born April 21, 1915) as Zorba.

Easternization

At the UAA Ethics Conference, Roger Ames pointed out that while we use the term globalization, that really isn't what's happening. I was struck by the fact that I'd never really thought about this term.  I had thought about the concept of cultural exchange being two way.  Globalization suggests that there is movement all over the globe in different directions.  Basically, what we have though, is Westernization.  What we have very little of is Easternization.

In terms of economics and consumerism, that would seem to be the case.  Every country is impacted by the market system, by the demand for more efficiency, by the demand for cheap labor, which draws people from the rural areas to the cities.  This process then undermines whatever social structure exists. Efficiency interrupts a more leisurely lifestyle.   Commodification gives everything a dollar value.   Work trumps family as people move away from home to the big(ger) cities so they can earn and send money back home.  Money replaces face to face relationships.  These folks live in relatively squalid conditions with strangers away from their families. (The housing for workers we saw at the university I taught at in Beijing who were constructing the super modern law building was makeshift, plywood, minimalist housing on campus at the construction site.) And their families back home compete for their wages with others at the work sites - prostitutes, alcohol and drugs dealers, gamblers, and an assortment of scam artists.  Cultural values tend to lose out to the competition for money to buy consumer goods.

So, even though one could argue the exchange is two-way because goods go from less economically developed countries to the rich countries, those goods are the supply for the Western generated market demand, and even China became capitalist to meet that demand.

There is some Eastern (and Southern) influences on the west.  We can dine on food from Asia, Africa, and South America.  We can go to Yoga and Tai Chi classes and even get acupuncture.  But much of this tends to get infected by market pressures so we get things like Power Yoga!  And to the extent that any of these is acknowledged as having any health benefits, they get bent and twisted to conform to insurance company rules.

In the Saturday session of the ethics conference, a professor from China who teaches in Los Angeles, said that Chinese women do not want to be the consumers of Western feminism, but want to be the producers of a Chinese feminism. The context of Western and Chinese culture, she said, require different strategies for dealing with the unequal treatment of women. 

By the way, I did ask about whether the papers would be posted online.  Yes, but later in the summer when they are all compiled into a book format. 

You Get What You Pay For

I'm paralyzed - there are so many things to write about I don't know where to start. I'll  never catch up.   But the genius of being an unpaid blogger is that if I don't post today, my readers can't cut my pay. 

Here are some things I'm not ready to post about:

Kid's Count Report - headline on the email:

No Child Left Behind—Except 73 Percent of Alaska’s 4^th Graders

Shocking New Numbers Rank Alaska 45^th in Nation for 4^th Grade Reading Proficiency; Show Troubling Racial Disparities in Learning Outcomes

Ervin Kaplan, artist

• Some art exhibit pics still from LA.  Here are the museum custodians playing tic tac toe on the Mondrian at jna gallery in Santa Monica.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
• Thoughts on the ADN's new sections on Science, Technology, Health; some of their headlines;  and the end of the Ear and what Amanda Coyne has done with its reincarnation, or as Hollis French might say, "pourquoi?"
  
• Book club meeting on Tom Kizzia's Pilgrim's Wilderness. 
  
• The Coast Guard's Kulluk report which seems to support the frustration this blog had with their press releases last year which tended to say how great Shell was doing and withhold everything else. 
• Impact of the Koch "dump Begich" campaign.
  
   
• Easternization and Confucius Meets Feminism -  followup from the Philosophy conference last weekend.

Or how nice a day it is today and why I should go out and enjoy the sun and snow and ice free surfaces (including in front of my house, but not yet everywhere.)

Just War and Christianity and Eastern Thought

Matthew Strebe

The basic premise of Matthew Strebe's paper, "Reformulating Warfare:  Just War Theory and Kantian Ethics," was that the theory of just war was created for a very different kind of war than what exists today.


OK, I'm copping out by not giving more details, but I know I wouldn't do it justice.  I should be taking better notes.  I'll check and see if any or all of these papers are online somewhere.



Strebe argues that Kantian ethics better suited to this than utilitarian ethics used in Just War Theory.

Tara Harrington's paper was "Thoughts from a Christian:  Can the World Afford to Practice Wu-Wei When it comes to Our Environment?"


She challenged Lynn White's assertion that  that biblical language about humans dominion over the earth is anti-environmental.







Right now Jacob Land is presenting "Drawing from the Same-Well:  Eastern Thought in Christian Ethics." He's highlighting quotes from Eastern thinkers and the bible.

When I saw Jacob just before this panel, I realized he was the man who was not allowed to carry his backpack on board the plane from LA yesterday.  I thought at the time - when Jacob showed him the backpack fit into the frame they have to test the size of carryons - that the Alaska Airlines rep was being pretty rigid. 

Changing Ed Philosophy in China and Comparison of Aristotle and Xunzu

The first presentation raised lots of issues I've worked on - particularly the conflicts between the rule of law approach to ethics that we pursue that ignores all the other emotional obligations that humans have.

Vivian-Lee Nyitray

I connected to the second for other reasons.




Vivian-Lee Nyitray is the Dean at two Chinese colleges -

Prospect in Chongqin and Taigu in Shanxi - and spoke about introducing more interactive teaching practices in those colleges and her own conflicting moral obligations to her students, her colleagues, and to her mission.  







Having taught in China, I understood her issues of changing the rows of seats into circles so that students were more involved and better able to interact with each other.   

But I only really had to focus on what happened in my class and not try to get other faculty to adopt more participatory teaching methods. 




Though there were some issues that went beyond the classroom - such as how my teaching methods impacted some of the Chinese faculty.  Fortunately, I had support from high in the college and a Chinese teacher who'd studied in the US also worked with me.

Nyitray looked toward Confucian philosophy as a way to work out some of the dilemmas she faced.

Shi Shan

The next speaker,  Shi Shan, was of interest because she's from the university I taught at in Beijing. 










Her presentation made comparisons of Aristotle and Xunzi's definitions of good. 




Unfortunately, trying to blog and listen at the same time is impacting my ability to concentrate sufficiently on some of the papers.



Here's the room we're in.  I know it as the Pub when it first opened here at UAA.  But there was strong local opposition to serving alcohol on campus and so it never has served as a pub.  Now it's called 'the den.' 

 Shi Shan presenting at UAA

"The Good, the Bad, and the Ethical"

That's part of the title of the first paper. 

Bauer and Kelly

I'm at the UAA Undergraduate Ethics Conference in the Pub.  It goes on today and tomorrow and Saturday morning.

This first presentation by Stephanie Bauer and Terry Kelly looked at the conflicts between Ethics and Morality -  a lawyer who has to win and may violate other values to do that.  I'm not going to try to explain what they said, but I'll give you the last couple of slides that summed things up.

I'll let you ponder this.  You don't have to understand it, just let it provoke your brain into thinking.  

I posted the whole program here the other day.  The conference is open to the public and free.  There's a community presentation tonight (Thursday) at East High on ethics and education.  7-9 pm.

Would Confucius Have Cut The Education Budget?

As Alaska's legislature is busy cutting the state education budget and trying to use what public money is left to give to private schools through vouchers, it might be a good time to get a bigger perspective on this.  The University of Alaska Anchorage Philosophy Department with an assist from the campus Confucius Institute is putting on a conference titled "Living Ethically in the Global World." 

The conference is pretty wide ranging and open to the public.  On the first night, there will be a community panel at East High School.   This was planned before the Governor, in his Orwellian way, declared this the "Year of Education."  I'm not sure the question in the title will be answered, but the recipient of the 2013 Confucian Prize will be on the East High panel.  So you can ask him if he doesn't address the issue in the panel.

“The Priorities and Ethics of Educating” Thursday, March 27, 2014 7:00 pm – 9:00 pm Community Panel at East High School Auditorium Panel: Andy Josephson, UAA Graduate and Alaska State Representative (It appears that Rep. Josephson's legislative duties will keep him in Juneau.) Roger Ames, 2013 Confucian Prize Recipient; Maria Williams, Director of Alaska Native Studies at UAA; Ed McLain, UAA College of Education Respondent: Francisco Miranda, UAA Department of Languages

This is actually both the Ninth Annual UAA Undergraduate Philosophy Conference and the UAA Ethics Center's Inaugural Convocation.

Here are some of the paper titles I pulled out of the program:

“Drawing from the Same Well:  Eastern Thought in Christian Ethics” “Yup’ik Culture is also Confucian” “Role Ethics in the Yijing” “Human Rights and Daoism: An Alternative Chinese Perspective” "Confucian Role Ethics for Women: A Response to Roger T. Ames’ Vocabulary” “The Impossible Junzi and Global Ethics” “Eastern Tones:  What Can Contemporary Acoustics Learn from Yin-Yang?” “Taking Responsibility: Toward a Sixth Confucian Relationship (with Notes from my Life as a Dean in China)” “Confucian Revivalism and Its Role in Chinese Society and Education”

You can find the exact times and locations for each of these in the program embedded below.

And here are the Universities that will be represented (in addition to UAA):

Prospect College and Taigu College (Chongqin and Shanxi Province, PRC) Renmin University (Beijing, PRC) Northeast Normal University Belmont University (Nashville, Tennessee) University of California Santa Cruz Loyola Marymount University University of San Diego (California) Hankuk University of Foreign Studies (Yongin, Korea) University of Wales (Great Britain) University of Hawai’i at Mānoa Central Washington University University of San Diego (California) Adrian College

I'd note that the UAA  Department of Public Administration has had a long going relationship with the public administration program at Renmin (People's) University in Beijing and I taught there in 2004. 

I checked and all the panels are open to the public at no charge. Fortunately, we'll be back in Anchorage.   Here's the full program:

Living Ethically in the Global World

And I'd urge people to get off the internet merry-go-round and take a few moments to think about the title of this conference: Acting Ethically in a Global World. What are some of the topics you would explore under that heading? Talk about it over dinner with your parents.