Letters to the Editor
William Timberman
Published Letters: 3298 Editor's Choice: 7
-
About treason
[Read the article: A genuine political sea change?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]One of the arguments in this thread has been about the treason of American leftists; did they or did they not spy for Stalin and the Soviet Union. Did Julius and Ethel Rosenberg and Harry Gold actually pass atomic secrets to the Russians? Did Alger Hiss spy for them at the State Department? I don't find the evidence completely compelling, but suppose for the sake of argument that they did exactly what they were charged -- and the Rosenbergs and Gold were convicted -- of doing.
Was it treason? In the narrow sense, yes, absolutely, but there's a broader sense, a moral sense, in which what they were said to have done could be considered as something quite different.
They were communists, or socialists, and as such, could be forgiven for thinking that if capitalists had exclusive use of the atomic bomb, the world would ultimately become a very nasty place for the champions of socialism. (It's hard to believe that Stalin was ever considered a champion of socialism, but hell, even Sartre, who was a lot more sophisticated than the Rosenbergs once frantically argued that he was.)
I imagine the same sort of thinking motivated Abdul Qadeer Khan; if the crusaders have the bomb, would it not be better if the Umma also had it?
I remember Jane Fonda's appearance in Hanoi, and the furor over it at the time. As an anti-war activist, frankly I was embarrassed by it. I thought it was egotistical, stupid and disrespectful. After all, it was true that American pilots were being tortured five miles away while she was offering expressions of solidarity with Uncle Ho, who was certainly a patriot, but hardly an angel.
That said, I didn't think Fonda was a traitor -- a publicity hound, yes, but not a traitor -- and I understood why she could have deluded herself into thinking she was advancing the brotherhood of man.
Likewise with the spies of the forties and fifties. What they did was dumb, and possibly destructive -- although after watching Cheney and the neocons threaten everyone with nuking, I wonder sometimes if they and Khan and Ahmadinejad didn't/don't have at least some right on their side. -- but was it teasonous? To the United States, perhaps; to the cause of humanity, I'm not so sure. Your mileage may vary.
-
Machinery
[Read the article: A genuine political sea change?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]What we seek is a delightfully diverse, safe, healthy and just world, with clean water, air, soil and power, that is economically, equitably, ecologically, and elegantly enjoyed. -- William McDonough, via j.m. greysky
It's been said before:
All Watched Over By Machines of Loving Grace
I like to think (and
the sooner the better!)
of a cybernetic meadow
where mammals and computers
live together in mutually
programming harmony
like pure water
touching clear sky.
I like to think
(right now, please!)
of a cybernetic forest
filled with pines and electronics
where deer stroll peacefully
past computers
as if they were flowers
with spinning blossoms.
I like to think
(it has to be!)
of a cybernetic ecology
where we are free of our labors
and joined back to nature,
returned to our mammal
brothers and sisters,
and all watched over
by machines of loving grace.
-- Richard Brautigan, 1968
May he rest in peace.
-
No, no, not THAT
[Read the article: A genuine political sea change?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I'm a voortrekker, if you please. Grey lensmen, brassards of peace, Barsoomian rykors, electric sheep. None of these bloodless liberal valhallas for me, thank you.
And yet, and yet....
-
MacK's point
[Read the article: A genuine political sea change?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]A pity Secretary Marshall couldn't have had a real wasteland to work with here in the U.S., rather than the intellectual one he and others actually had to face.
If he'd been so lucky, who knows...we might today have been as well off as France or Germany. (Yes, I know they both have their problems, but imperial wars, intelligent design, and no health care aren't among them.)
-
A vote for Blade Runner
[Read the article: A genuine political sea change?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I've already voted. This was written 20 years ago, and has some quaintly dated passages, but I'm not as embarrassed by it as I thought I would be (It's been a while since I looked at it.)
http://motley-focus.com/future.html
-
Prometheus over armed bureaucrats, actually
[Read the article: A genuine political sea change?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I favored Rutger Hauer, or rather the Roy Batty character. Also Ridley Scott, whose real genius is entirely visual.
-
@ IngSoc
[Read the article: A genuine political sea change?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Good to see your comments again after such a long absence. You've put your finger on the real dystopia, I think -- what happens to the nail which sticks up. Not unlike Blade Runner, come to think of it.
-
Is this something?
[Read the article: A genuine political sea change?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The current New Yorker has a long piece on Barack Obama which is of interest in this context of sea change. Time will tell, of course, but if its characterization of Obama is even half true, one has to wonder how such a person managed to appear at just this juncture in our history.
What I mean is that I've been predicting the appearance of someone like this for some time -- only to myself, of course, and maybe predicting is too strong a word. Hoping, or thinking wishfully, or imagining are probably more accurate. Still, I don't think this mental foreshadowing is as silly as it sounds. Glenn, for example, appeared just when the need for such a person, with exactly his agenda and exactly his talents had started to become almost painfully evident.
No, I don't think Obama is the Messiah, or necessarily the best candidate around. I don't think so yet, anyway, but he is saying things we haven't heard in a while, and he may actually believe them. Of course, the New Yorker has its own agenda, and writers good enough to conjure as well as any magus of legend, but as I say, the article is interesting.
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/05/07/070507fa_fact_macfarquhar