I wonder what it is about the American psyche that makes us particularly susceptible to fruity crackpot religions: whether it's the original Puritans, Mormonism, televangelism, scientology, New Age hocus pocus, it seems like we're constantly looking for some new big "ANSWER" to it all and a silly megalomaniacal guru to give it to us. One charitable answer might be that's it's the big idealistic streak in American culture. More likely though that we're just simplistic fools ready for any get rich (or "enlightened") quick scheme.

That said, Castaneda's books are a pretty good read, at least the first two. There are little insights, whether "plaigarized" or not, but basically they're just fun stories about a guy who takes a lot of drugs and has some bizarre adventures. There's no profound wisdom in them, but as novels they do work to make you think about consciousness, reality, different cultures, drug use etc. Obviously a mistake to take them literally, or see them as directions for how to lead your life!

As adolescents my friends took jimson weed, in part I think because of the don Juan books. Bad idea! But it didn't kill them.

I only skimmed the interview (this guy's not exactly the most articulate person around) so I'm sorry if this was mentioned, but to me the interesting question is why we have secret grand juries in the US. Witnesses and defendants aren't given their Constitutional rights. Prosecutors are given free rein, and the grand jury results are used to pressure juries in the real trial. More relevant than whether or not a blogger is a journalist, is the question of whether we would have the largest prison population in the world if we eliminated grand juries.

Sounds like the letter writer has discovered the great East/West cultural divide. To someone from the West Coast, east coasters are abrasive, rude, selfish, loud, uptight and narrow-minded. East coasters find west coasters to be hypocritical namby-pambys full of false politeness. Frankly I think the West Coast version is a little more accurate. The East Coast version is premised on the idea that no one could possibly be honestly polite. Actually, it is possible to be honest and polite at the same time!

It's understandable why New yorkers are the way they are. If you aren't pushy, defensive and a bit obnoxious you'll get run right over by everyone else. But to act that way in a place where other people are more laid-back just makes you look like, well, an asshole.

I love the comment from the guy who says the further you go from New York the less honest people are! And he means it! That is what makes a lot of New Yorkers annoying: they truly honestly believe that it is the best place on earth, that everything there is perfect. It's not! I won't list all its flaws, because they're really too obvious and it would be rather unfair. But to those New Yorkers who think all non-New Yorkers are "dishonest" and you can't "be yourself": did it ever occur to you that just blurting out every selfish, angry thought you have might be unpleasant to some people? And why do you have so many selfish, angry thoughts? And why do you assume everyone else has them and is just being "dishonest" by not expressing them?

Well, kicking him out of the World Bank will be a start. But a war crimes tribunal is really where Wolfie belongs. Anyway I doubt the World Bank has ever been much more than a facade for the interests of the US elite. Wolfie was just a little too obvious about it: cancelling aid for Uzbekistan only two months after they refused to have US military bases, appointing pro-Iraq war ministers from other countries to top World Bank positions, God knows what else he's been up to. Getting his mistress a promotion against World Bank rules is the least of it, I'm sure. But the World Bank is hardly a hotbed of leftism: you know you're in trouble when a bunch of career bureaucrats dedicated to funneling taxpayer money to contractor boondoggles boo you for being too slimy.

It's just like that episode where one guy's black on the left side, white on the right; the other guy vice versa. I loved the comment one makes to Spock, something like "can't you see he's obviously inferior? He's black on the RIGHT side!"

Of course Star Trek's point was not that we'll "always be fighting cuz it's our nature" but that we fight for stupid, irrational reasons. And hopefully that will change one day.

I sympathize with the letter writer. Many people treat shy, awkward or strange people, not to speak of the mentally ill, as if they were moral failures deserving of contempt and scorn. They gossip behind your back, snub you, isolate you and grow incomprehensibly angry at you. This of course only exacerbates the person's anxieties and neuroses. Why can't people understand that it takes all kinds to make a world, and if someone behaves oddly or is especially introverted, it's not a reason to treat them as outcasts? I'm disturbed by the articles I see (e.g. in the NYT) making much of how the VT killer was quiet and a loner. Not all quiet loners are homicidal!

The killings were not, as Cary says, "meaningless." And the emphasis on the killer's personality, or lack thereof, distracts from the real questions: the alienating nature of US culture, and the effects of anti-depressants. They're known to cause psychotic episodes in some people. Many random killers have been on antidepressants like Prozac. Drug companies have been sued over it, but they settle out of court to keep the story out of the media. We need an investigation into the harmful effects of Prozac now!