Years ago I did what you might call “reviews” of Star Trek episodes. I mostly just briefly noted what progressive politics were involved and sometimes used that as an excuse to talk about similar situations in reality.
Last year I finally watched all five seasons of Babylon 5, another sci-fi show, one I had thought of watching once in a while stretching back a couple decades. It isn’t as political or as progressive as ST but there’s some good stuff there- in fact, on one issue, a progressive take on the working-class and/or labor movement, B5 is better than ST. Because there is so little progressive material, I’m going to do one post for every four episodes reviewed, and only mention the episodes that have some progressive political stuff. I might ignore some of the more minor and/or less unique stuff about conflict resolution because from what I remember, it’s very common in this series. Also, although less so than is the case with Star Trek, multiculturalism is a big part of Babylon Five and I will also only be commenting on that when it goes further than usual. There are issues raised about telepaths- I’m going to completely ignore stuff about telepaths when reviewing these episodes. I also will probably say nothing about the conflict with the evil race the Shadows- sure, I could say Trump is as evil as they are or compare them to Nazi Germany, but that’s kind of silly (I’m sure there is nothing political about the Shadows, they’re just evil, like the Borg or the Empire). And I might skip most of the stuff about the conflict between B5 and the Earth government- I don’t remember it involving stuff like a strong capitalist agenda or racism or something.
**Season 4 Episode 8 “The Illusion of Truth”** See this for a plot summary.
This episode is about the presidential propaganda TV station doing a story about Babylon 5, promising to be relatively objective and expose viewers to B5’s point of view. What is broadcast though is a dishonest attack on B5.
Some things worth noting as they stand out more than the general lies and propaganda of the story about B5:
1. A report that gov’t forces on Mars are making progress against the resistance there.
2. In a newly reconstituted senate, there is a McCarthyist “Committee on Anti-Earth Activities." Apparently some or many or most caught up in the witch-hunt are “hospitalized” so that they can “one day return to society [as] active and productive citizen[s].”
The story about B5 is so full of nonsense that I’m not going to cover all of the details or explain what was done by referring to the scenes being filmed in the first half of the episode. The main theme is that in general the B5 rebels are self-hating humans who believe they are inferior to aliens in every way and that is why they are (the show alleges) subservient to aliens.
A last few notes on economic justice on B5. Lennier is showing the journalists “Down Below” and they have a conversation about it, most of which is new information:
Lennier:“ Babylon 5 has always had an under-class. People who come here in search of a better life and find themselves stranded when they run out of money. They become a cheap workforce for some of the less reputable businessmen.
Journalist: So, they’re exploited.
Lennier:Sometimes, yes. The captain stops it when he hears of it. He’s instituted work programs so that they can earn money while helping to repair the station.
…..
Lennier: This is Doctor Stephen Franklin. He operates a free clinic for these people.
**Season 4 Episode 9 “Atonement”** See this for a plot summary.
This episode is overwhelmingly about the Minbari.
In an earlier review I defended Delenn against allegations she was something comparable to (you might say) a leader of Al-Qaeda and I said some nice things about the Minbari. Although my defense of Delenn stands (she DID transform herself into a hybrid of human and Minbari and she IS in a serious relationship with a human), apparently Minbar officially bans inter-species marriages. Her clan (part of the religious caste) didn’t approve of her transformation and seem inclined to oppose her taking a human as a mate. For that reason she must do a ritual called the “dreaming” where she is confronted with elements of her past.
The leader of the Minbari (in her memories that are explored), Dukhat, says that humans are reportedly primitive and dangerous. Considering that Earth is not comparable to the Federation of Star Trek, this is a fairly progressive statement. The Grey Council (the leadership of the Minbari) all argue that they should not make contact with Earth for different reasons:
1) The workers caste worried about competition with another source of food. The specific reference to food is a little weird but in general it's far from unheard of- a massive chunk of the American working-class, even large chunks of the labor movement, do see foreign workers as competition. In reality (and maybe in the world of Babylon 5) that’s a very unhelpful stance to take. I’m not saying it’s totally unreasonable for workers to feel that way, but it can often fuel racism which is even less helpful and there are better ways to create and protect jobs here.
2) The religious caste is “worried about the impact of strange, primitive ideas.” This erodes my opinion that they are not conservative, but also could be relatively harmless (relative to clear-cut xenophobia).
3) The warrior caste believe they should not associate with “inferior” cultures. Again, more or less xenophobic, but the warrior caste has never been illustrated as a positive part of Minbari society.
A big part of this episode revolves around the opening shots of the Earth-Minbar War. In addition to not speaking the other’s language, part of the explanation is that the humans didn’t recognize the traditional warrior caste approach with gun ports open (i.e. ready to fire). They mean it as a non-threatening “gesture of strength and respect”- the approach is “open-handed.” In general it might not be totally ridiculous for the warrior caste to see that as something unlikely to start a war. But when they describe it as “open-handed” it’s just not true. Open gun ports is like showing a fist.
Earlier in the episode Delenn supports a course of action in relation to humans that is fairly constructive and diplomatic. But after Dukhat is killed, she wants blood and casts the tie-breaking vote in favor of war. Later after that first battle was over she reverts back to her earlier stance and tried to pull a blood-thirsty nation and military back from the abyss of war. Another member of the planetary leadership, demanding blood minutes earlier, now seems to have followed Delann and says that they should have made contact with the humans BEFORE a war started.
At the end we learn that a historical political/religious/military leader of Minbar (who was not Minbari but human) fathered children with a Minbari woman. 1,000 years later his descendants can’t be counted they are so numerous. Delenn uses the fact that before her transformation she already had human DNA inside her (so it doesn’t matter if she has children with a human (they wouldn’t be completely Minbari anyway)) to defend her plans with Capt. Sheridan.
One other detail about the episode. Sheridan sends two of his men to Mars to establish contact with the resistance there. I remember the first time I watched this show I wasn’t very interested in that part of the Earth Civil War, but I have changed my mind.
**Season 4 Episode 10 “Racing Mars”** See this for a plot summary.
There are two small progressive political items.
1. First the two men meeting with the Mars resistance are given cover stories that involve them being married to each other. To be honest I wouldn’t be surprised if the writers put that in there partly for some laughs, but considering the episode they did about HIV/AIDS I think it’s safe to also see it as a serious statement against homophobia.
2. At one point the Pope is referred to as a woman!
**Season 4, Episode 11 “Lines of Communication”** See this for a plot summary.
There are three political aspects to this episode.
1. We learn that the caste system on Minbar is breaking down. At it’s extreme, the warrior caste in one city left the religious caste to die by expelling them from the city, thus forcing them to walk through the elements to the nearest city. The warrior caste are also creating their own leadership to replace the Grey Council.
2. Captain Sheridan’s emissary to the Mars resistance tells them that after the Earth Civil War is over, Mars will be independent.
He also criticizes them for bombing civilian targets. It’s unclear exactly what he means. That comment seems inspired by a bombing at a hotel that was aimed at members of the security forces but which was carried out in a way that unsurprisingly killed 10 civilians as well (it’s not known how many members of the security forces were killed). I go into more detail about whether or not IRA attacks were terrorism here, but briefly, even if the targets of a bomb are combatants in very close proximity to civilians, if no effort is made to avoid civilian death it sounds more or less sort of like terrorism to me.
Sheridan’s representative says that civilian casualties turn off people, including those who should be supporting a struggle for liberation. I think that’s very true. But it seems like many western progressive supporters of Hamas (the party in the Palestinian territories) don’t get that. Hamas’s military wing, in their offensive activities (their operations) largely targeted civilians (and seem to have allowed other factions in Gaza to target civilians). As far as I can tell, their rival, the PLO, seems to have failed miserably to achieve victory for their people in the Peace Process, and I get the impression a lot of progressives criticize them for that and some other stuff. To those who focus on that failure and who then turn to Hamas, I say that whatever mistakes the PLO have made that weakened the Palestinian struggle, at least they didn’t damage it as much as Hamas' military wing has because of attacks on civilians they carried out or permitted.
Showing posts with label mcCarthyism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label mcCarthyism. Show all posts
Thursday, January 18, 2018
Wednesday, September 27, 2017
Babylon 5 Reviews G
Years ago I did what you might call “reviews” of Star Trek episodes. I mostly just briefly noted what progressive politics were involved and sometimes used that as an excuse to talk about similar situations in reality.
Last year I finally watched all five seasons of Babylon 5, another sci-fi show, one I had thought of watching once in a while stretching back a couple decades. It isn’t as political or as progressive as ST but there’s some good stuff there- in fact, on one issue, a progressive take on the working-class and/or labor movement, B5 is better than ST. Because there is so little progressive material, I’m going to do one post for every four episodes reviewed, and only mention the episodes that have some progressive political stuff. I might ignore some of the more minor and/or less unique stuff about conflict resolution because from what I remember, it’s very common in this series. Also, although less so than is the case with Star Trek, multiculturalism is a big part of Babylon Five and I will also only be commenting on that when it goes further than usual. There are issues raised about telepaths- I’m going to completely ignore stuff about telepaths when reviewing these episodes. I also will probably say nothing about the conflict with the evil race the Shadows- sure, I could say Trump is as evil as they are or compare them to Nazi Germany, but that’s kind of silly (I’m sure there is nothing political about the Shadows, they’re just evil, like the Borg or the Empire). And I might skip most of the stuff about the conflict between B5 and the Earth government- I don’t remember it involving stuff like a strong capitalist agenda or racism or something.
**Season 3 Episode 3 “A Day in the Strife”** See this for a plot summary.
This episode contains a fair amount of stuff about the Centauri occupation of Narn. We learn that there is a resistance and that for every Centauri killed 500 Narn are killed. The former dissolved the old Narn government and created a provisional government. The representative of it sent to B5 opposes the resistance, saying it is the wrong time. I am inclined to think, when would be the right time? This Narn collaborator vaguely talks about waiting until they’re a bit stronger and the Centauri have been lulled into a sense of false security. Between the fact that he is officially a collaborator and at one point he blames the resistance, not the Centauri, for the nightmare the Narn are experiencing, I’m inclined to dismiss his opposition to the resistance.
Looking at N. Ireland, I believe that certainly there were some times when it was a bad idea to use violence. First I have supported the cease-fire since day one. And I would agree that in the late '60s it would have been inappropriate for the IRA to have been conducting operations in N. Ireland. But after Aug. 1969 (when there were massive anti-catholic pogroms) and especially about 9 months later when, independent of the IRA, the relationship between the British Army and the nationalist community went bad, it was legitimate for the IRA to attack the security forces. After that, they usually had the backing of about 40% of the population and in my opinion the right analysis of the situation- it was very important to unite Ireland, considering what had been done to the nationalist population around 1970. As I explain here only about .3% of the IRA’s operations were aimed at killing civilians.
There is a scene in the episode which I think is worth quoting in full. The Narn representative of the new government meets wit the Centauri ambassador (Mollari) and his aide, Vir.
Mollari: You know, I was thinking of visiting your world sometime soon. I couldn’t really get a good look at it the last time I was in the area. Do you think it would be safe for someone such as myself to visit your world now?
Na’far: Yes, quite safe.
Mollari: The streets are kept clear of troublemakers, rock throwers, protestors?
Nar’far: The surviving streets are quite empty, ambassador.
Molarri: The work farms, the relocation camps, the construction gangs are all operating at capacity?
Na’far: (nodds)
Mollari: And the executions, Na’far? The executions continue?
Na’far: The executions continue.
Mollari: Progress! It’s a beautiful thing to behold, no, Vir? [to Na’far] you may contact G’Kar, now. go, go (Na’far leaves)
Vir: Was that necessary?
Mollari: They got out of their place once. We must make sure it does not happen again.
Vir: Londo, we’ve beaten them. Their cities are in ashes, their mlitary is wiped out. They’ve lost hundreds and thousands of lives. They have nothing left!
Mollari: No, there you are wrong. They still have their pride. He tries to hide it, this one, but I can see it in his eyes. As long as it remains, they will always be a threat.
Vir: So, is that what it’s about? Pride? It’s not enough that we’ve beaten them, we have to break them?
Mollari: Yes. I’m sorry, I thought you understood that. I don’t want our people to go through this in another 100 years.
I think this illustrates the racial nature of imperialism very well.
**Season 3 Episode 5 “Voices of Authority”** See this for a plot summary.
The main political dimension to this episode is the appointment of a Political Officer to keep an eye on Sheridan. She talks a lot about his need to be more sensitive to what the Earth Government wants. She says a few other things that are worth noting:
1. She doubts that the Centauri are bent on war because Earth has a treaty with them- but in the previous year or so, the Centauri were invading planet after planet and showed no signs of stopping.
2. She says the homeless people on Earth don’t want jobs and have chosen to be homeless. She says “they’re either lazy, or they’re criminal or they’re mentally unstable.” She says that the Earth Government has promised everyone a job. But that must be something they didn’t follow up on (Captain Sheridan says the homeless can’t get jobs). At one point she admits that they re-wrote the dictionary in order to “solve” problems.
3. She talks about the expansion of McCarthy-esque policies and admits that civil rights and civil liberties will be abridged further than they already have been, and explicitly talks about keeping Earth “ideologically pure.”
**Season 3 Episode 6 “Dust to Dust”** For a plot summary see this.
There is one small bit of politics at the beginning. It's another example of the Night Watch’s McCarthyism. Captain Sheridan stands against it forcefully.
**Season 3 Episode 10 “Severed Dreams”** See this for a plot summary.
In recent episodes there was nothing that really stood out as especially political. The anti-democratic tendencies of the Earth Government have been mentioned in episodes a little earlier so I didn’t say anything till now about the political crisis on Earth when it was exposed that the President had come into power as the result of a coup. Martial law was declared, the Senate was dissolved, and in this episode, there is a full-blown civil war.
In this episode, Mars rebels against the government, and two other colonies plus Babylon 5 declare independence.
Last year I finally watched all five seasons of Babylon 5, another sci-fi show, one I had thought of watching once in a while stretching back a couple decades. It isn’t as political or as progressive as ST but there’s some good stuff there- in fact, on one issue, a progressive take on the working-class and/or labor movement, B5 is better than ST. Because there is so little progressive material, I’m going to do one post for every four episodes reviewed, and only mention the episodes that have some progressive political stuff. I might ignore some of the more minor and/or less unique stuff about conflict resolution because from what I remember, it’s very common in this series. Also, although less so than is the case with Star Trek, multiculturalism is a big part of Babylon Five and I will also only be commenting on that when it goes further than usual. There are issues raised about telepaths- I’m going to completely ignore stuff about telepaths when reviewing these episodes. I also will probably say nothing about the conflict with the evil race the Shadows- sure, I could say Trump is as evil as they are or compare them to Nazi Germany, but that’s kind of silly (I’m sure there is nothing political about the Shadows, they’re just evil, like the Borg or the Empire). And I might skip most of the stuff about the conflict between B5 and the Earth government- I don’t remember it involving stuff like a strong capitalist agenda or racism or something.
**Season 3 Episode 3 “A Day in the Strife”** See this for a plot summary.
This episode contains a fair amount of stuff about the Centauri occupation of Narn. We learn that there is a resistance and that for every Centauri killed 500 Narn are killed. The former dissolved the old Narn government and created a provisional government. The representative of it sent to B5 opposes the resistance, saying it is the wrong time. I am inclined to think, when would be the right time? This Narn collaborator vaguely talks about waiting until they’re a bit stronger and the Centauri have been lulled into a sense of false security. Between the fact that he is officially a collaborator and at one point he blames the resistance, not the Centauri, for the nightmare the Narn are experiencing, I’m inclined to dismiss his opposition to the resistance.
Looking at N. Ireland, I believe that certainly there were some times when it was a bad idea to use violence. First I have supported the cease-fire since day one. And I would agree that in the late '60s it would have been inappropriate for the IRA to have been conducting operations in N. Ireland. But after Aug. 1969 (when there were massive anti-catholic pogroms) and especially about 9 months later when, independent of the IRA, the relationship between the British Army and the nationalist community went bad, it was legitimate for the IRA to attack the security forces. After that, they usually had the backing of about 40% of the population and in my opinion the right analysis of the situation- it was very important to unite Ireland, considering what had been done to the nationalist population around 1970. As I explain here only about .3% of the IRA’s operations were aimed at killing civilians.
There is a scene in the episode which I think is worth quoting in full. The Narn representative of the new government meets wit the Centauri ambassador (Mollari) and his aide, Vir.
Mollari: You know, I was thinking of visiting your world sometime soon. I couldn’t really get a good look at it the last time I was in the area. Do you think it would be safe for someone such as myself to visit your world now?
Na’far: Yes, quite safe.
Mollari: The streets are kept clear of troublemakers, rock throwers, protestors?
Nar’far: The surviving streets are quite empty, ambassador.
Molarri: The work farms, the relocation camps, the construction gangs are all operating at capacity?
Na’far: (nodds)
Mollari: And the executions, Na’far? The executions continue?
Na’far: The executions continue.
Mollari: Progress! It’s a beautiful thing to behold, no, Vir? [to Na’far] you may contact G’Kar, now. go, go (Na’far leaves)
Vir: Was that necessary?
Mollari: They got out of their place once. We must make sure it does not happen again.
Vir: Londo, we’ve beaten them. Their cities are in ashes, their mlitary is wiped out. They’ve lost hundreds and thousands of lives. They have nothing left!
Mollari: No, there you are wrong. They still have their pride. He tries to hide it, this one, but I can see it in his eyes. As long as it remains, they will always be a threat.
Vir: So, is that what it’s about? Pride? It’s not enough that we’ve beaten them, we have to break them?
Mollari: Yes. I’m sorry, I thought you understood that. I don’t want our people to go through this in another 100 years.
I think this illustrates the racial nature of imperialism very well.
**Season 3 Episode 5 “Voices of Authority”** See this for a plot summary.
The main political dimension to this episode is the appointment of a Political Officer to keep an eye on Sheridan. She talks a lot about his need to be more sensitive to what the Earth Government wants. She says a few other things that are worth noting:
1. She doubts that the Centauri are bent on war because Earth has a treaty with them- but in the previous year or so, the Centauri were invading planet after planet and showed no signs of stopping.
2. She says the homeless people on Earth don’t want jobs and have chosen to be homeless. She says “they’re either lazy, or they’re criminal or they’re mentally unstable.” She says that the Earth Government has promised everyone a job. But that must be something they didn’t follow up on (Captain Sheridan says the homeless can’t get jobs). At one point she admits that they re-wrote the dictionary in order to “solve” problems.
3. She talks about the expansion of McCarthy-esque policies and admits that civil rights and civil liberties will be abridged further than they already have been, and explicitly talks about keeping Earth “ideologically pure.”
**Season 3 Episode 6 “Dust to Dust”** For a plot summary see this.
There is one small bit of politics at the beginning. It's another example of the Night Watch’s McCarthyism. Captain Sheridan stands against it forcefully.
**Season 3 Episode 10 “Severed Dreams”** See this for a plot summary.
In recent episodes there was nothing that really stood out as especially political. The anti-democratic tendencies of the Earth Government have been mentioned in episodes a little earlier so I didn’t say anything till now about the political crisis on Earth when it was exposed that the President had come into power as the result of a coup. Martial law was declared, the Senate was dissolved, and in this episode, there is a full-blown civil war.
In this episode, Mars rebels against the government, and two other colonies plus Babylon 5 declare independence.
Tuesday, September 19, 2017
Babylon 5 Reviews F
Years ago I did what you might call “reviews” of Star Trek episodes. I mostly just briefly noted what progressive politics were involved and sometimes used that as an excuse to talk about similar situations in reality.
Last year I finally watched all five seasons of Babylon 5, another sci-fi show, one I had thought of watching once in a while stretching back a couple decades. It isn’t as political or as progressive as ST but there’s some good stuff there- in fact, on one issue, a progressive take on the working-class and/or labor movement, B5 is better than ST. Because there is so little progressive material, I’m going to do one post for every four episodes reviewed, and only mention the episodes that have some progressive political stuff. I might ignore some of the more minor and/or less unique stuff about conflict resolution because from what I remember, it’s very common in this series. Also, although less so than is the case with Star Trek, multiculturalism is a big part of Babylon Five and I will also only be commenting on that when it goes further than usual. There are issues raised about telepaths- I’m going to completely ignore stuff about telepaths when reviewing these episodes. I also will probably say nothing about the conflict with the evil race the Shadows- sure, I could say Trump is as evil as they are or compare them to Nazi Germany, but that’s kind of silly (I’m sure there is nothing political about the Shadows, they’re just evil, like the Borg or the Empire). And I might skip most of the stuff about the conflict between B5 and the Earth government- I don’t remember it involving stuff like a strong capitalist agenda or racism or something.
**Season 2, Episode 12 “Acts of Sacrifice”** See this for a plot summary.
There are about seven political issues here:
1) The Narn ambassador G’Kar tries to get support from Earth Alliance and the Minbari in their war with the Centauri. The ambassador from the Minbari is reluctant to see Minbar side with the Narn, partly because they were in a war just about 10 years earlier and she doesn’t want another war. And partly because they have reason to believe that if the war started going the Narns’ way, they might try to give the Centauri a dose of their own genocidal medicine. The Narn, who experienced a near-genocidal Centauri occupation when G’Kar was younger, seem to have adopted the slogan “Never Again” but sometimes sound like they might take it to the extreme of beating the Centauri race to death.
2) Tensions between the Narn and Centuri civilians on B5 are growing. In one incident a group of the latter are in a bar talking about how the Centauri Republic is now “great again” as a result of their war with the Narn. They go on to insult the Narn people. A group of Narn hear this and a fight almost starts.
3) A representative from an unfamiliar alien race comes to B5 to meet representatives of the Earth Alliance (Sheridan wants them either as allies, or as members of the League of Non-Aligned Worlds). It quickly becomes apparent that they believe they are superior and most other races are inferior.
At one point they talk about letting evolution take it’s course and letting races die off or profit without any interference such as medical help but they DO believe in medical help for their own people.
At another point they are shown the poor part of B5, where the population is mostly human. They admire what they see as a racial policy by humans of segregating the relatively inferior parts of humanity. Obviously B5 isn’t doing that but it’s interesting to see what seems like the writers of the show taking a swipe at the Earth Alliance and B5’s leadership for failing to create a utopia like the Federation in Star Trek (to a large degree the senior staff of B5 are more or less progressive but it seems like they’re dependent on Earth Alliance for funding and the poverty on Earth follows people to B5).
**Season 2 Episode 16 “In the Shadow of Z’Ha’Dum”** See this for a plot summary.
There are 1-2 political aspects to this episode. First, Captain Sheridan detains a man for questioning for more than 10 hours without charging him. The chief of security, after 10 hours, tries to convince him to let the guy go, and resigns when he won’t. As I’ve said before the chief of security seems like the least progressive of B5’s command staff and seems more concerned about getting in trouble than about the civil liberties issue involved. I’m tempted to say that this seriously erodes my opinion of Captain Sheridan as a progressive, but on the other hand, he was detaining the guy for non-political reasons. It wasn’t a case of political dissent or alleged criminal activity. His wife was lost on a space exploration mission and he had good reason to think that the detainee knew what really happened to her. It was still wrong to detain the guy but I find it less offensive than I would if it were about dissent or crime. He ends up admitting to the security chief that he (Sheridan) was wrong and says it won’t happen again.
The other political thing is that the government on Earth has created a “Ministry of Peace.” Initially it sounds like something almost progressive. But it turns out that it sees (political) division and dissent in the human population as a threat to peace. They depoliticize dissent and see it as a criminal or psychological problem and recruit people to report such behavior to them, so that dissidents can be “helped.” Even worse, this is an illegal and more or less right-wing government (it’s not super-clear, but if they continue some of the policies of the last President and you combine that with new actions and attitudes of the new regime, they’re fairly right-wing (especially if the more offensive senators are aligned with the new President and I don’t think there’s anything saying otherwise)). Below is the full transcript of the Ministry of Peace representative trying to recruit people:
MoP: In the last 10 years Earth has rebuilt it’s defenses magnificently. We can protect our people from physical harm. But is that enough? We cannot hope to make peace with other civilizations until we have found peace with ourselves. And that, quite simply, is what the Ministry of Peace is all about. Now as Babylon 5 has an early warning system to detect possible attacks, we at the Ministry of Peace have created a system of our own. We call it the Night Watch, named after those brave citizens who stood vigil in the darkness against possible enemies. It’s a completely volunteer organization, officially endorsed by Earth Dome [the government]. Members receive 50 credits per week above and beyond their regular salaries for services rendered.
POSSIBLE RECRUIT: What kind of services?
MoP: Mainly just to be present wearing the colors of the Night Watch. Raise public awareness, make them start thinking about peace, about the way they treat one another.
POSSIBLE RECRUIT 2: I can’t believe Earth would pay us 50 credits a week just to walk around the station.
MoP: Correct. As the name implies you must also be watchful. Peace can be made or broken with a gun, a word, an idea, even a thought. Now those who work against peace sow the seeds of discontent. They plant stories. They undermine the public good. It’s not because they are necessarily evil, it’s because they don’t know any better. They’re unhappy. And they lash out in the only way they can. So if we are made aware of these problems as they occur then we can find these people. We can talk to these people. We can embrace them in the arms of society while at the same time protecting society from misinformation and harmful ideas. We’re less interested in actions than we are in attitudes. We must help protect society against it’s own worst instincts. By taking these bold steps we will help to ensure a better future for everyone. I’m proud to be a part of it and I hope you’ll all join me in becoming part of the Night Watch.
**Season 2 Episode 18 “Confessions and Lamentations”** See this for a plot summary.
Although I might not change this, when I wrote (in the intros to these reviews) that Babylon 5 wasn’t as progressive as Star Trek, I was thinking partly of the issue of gay rights. Neither ST nor B5 have any LGBT characters (well, ST kind of does, in the MIRROR UNIVERSE but that’s only about .3% of all the Star Trek episodes and B5 MIGHT have one character who is both male and female but it’s unclear and only comes up very briefly in one episode (he only outs himself to one person, who seems uncomfortable with it)). But ST drops some hints in at least 4 episodes that homophobia is wrong. I know that in the 1980s homophobia was a big part of our nation’s response to HIV/AIDS and I think that it’s probably been a slowly declining part of it since then. With that in mind, B5 DID do (in 1995) an episode basically about HIV/AIDS.
It’s revealed that an alien race, the Markab, are experiencing a deadly plague. At one point Dr. Franklin compares the response of the Markab to the plague with the heterosexual population's response to HIV/AIDS.
After he learns about the plague, he has a conversation with a Markab doctor who had been trying to cover it up. Three of the Markab doctor’s comments are worth quoting directly.
“It is not something we talk about…. The disease only appeared once before. Centuries ago. On a small island on our world, noted for certain excesses. When it was struck down, the rest of my people believed it was a punishment by the gods for their lack of morality.”
“The first new case of Drafa [the plague] was detected nearly a year ago. The family was so scandalized by it that they lied about what killed him.”
“Some of us have been working to find a cure without enough money or resources. They [the government] don’t want to talk about it, as if the very subject makes them dirty.”
In the end, it appears that at least 99% of the Markab population is dead. And they might have found a cure if not for their hostility towards those they considered immoral.
**Season 2 Episode 22 “The Fall of Night”** See this for a plot summary.
We learn towards the beginning that the Centuari have been attacking some of the space and planets of it’s neighbors. Their ambassador claims it is to create a buffer zone around the space of the Centauris and claims it will reduce tension and war, which makes no sense. Even if the races attacked DON’T go to war with the Centauri immediately it’s unlikely they will resume normal relations with their invader before many years have passed and they will make arrangements to repel any more attacks, which will mean a lot of military forces close to the areas seized for the buffer zone.
Most of this episode is about the growing schism between B5 and the Earth Alliance. Two representatives of the Ministry of Peace (one from the Night Watch (I say a lot about it in the second review in this post)) come aboard B5 to talk with various ambassadors. The one who leads the Night Watch has an interesting conversation with a recurring minor character in the security force who is a (dissenting) member of NW. The MoP leader uses the word sedition to refer to the threat being dealt with by the NW, and mentioned the following examples: A) a store owner who felt that the regulations for imports were “nuts;” B) dock-workers consistently late for work (allegedly affecting efficiency); C) poor residents of B5 talking to reporters about poverty there and back on Earth (finally evidence that the new regime brought in by a hidden coup is capitalist); D) and lastly two more shop owners openly criticizing presidential decisions.
This next subject over-laps with the last one, but there is a lot about the Centauri-Narn conflict. I sometimes encounter minor topics that I decide to skip and in recent episodes there have been a few things about that conflict that I want to mention here. First, when the Centauri (strategically helped by the evil Shadows) find the Narn Homeworld unguarded, they bombard it from orbit with things called “mass drivers” which are banned by practically everyone except the Centauri. Here and there the B5 command staff have been fairly sympathetic to the Narn side of things, and with good reason. The last time the Centauri occupied Narn planets and space it was genocidal and after the first time a Narn outpost is occupied by the Centauri in this series (season 2, episode 9), initially the latter wanted to keep the civilian population for forced labor (they only abandon that plan when faced with a threat by Earth to send observers).
In this episode, a Narn heavy cruiser that somehow survived the defeat of Narn by the Centauri comes to B5 seeking sanctuary. After that, the leader of the MoP tells Sheridan that Earth has successfully negotiated a non-aggression treaty with the Centauri. A member of the NW who is stationed in Command and Control reports the hidden presence of the ship. A Centauri warship shows up and ends up being destroyed by B5 while the Narn escape.
At the end of the episode, two things happen: 1) the Centauri invade more space of the League of Non-Aligned Worlds races, and 2) a shop-keeper is taken away by NW members.
Last year I finally watched all five seasons of Babylon 5, another sci-fi show, one I had thought of watching once in a while stretching back a couple decades. It isn’t as political or as progressive as ST but there’s some good stuff there- in fact, on one issue, a progressive take on the working-class and/or labor movement, B5 is better than ST. Because there is so little progressive material, I’m going to do one post for every four episodes reviewed, and only mention the episodes that have some progressive political stuff. I might ignore some of the more minor and/or less unique stuff about conflict resolution because from what I remember, it’s very common in this series. Also, although less so than is the case with Star Trek, multiculturalism is a big part of Babylon Five and I will also only be commenting on that when it goes further than usual. There are issues raised about telepaths- I’m going to completely ignore stuff about telepaths when reviewing these episodes. I also will probably say nothing about the conflict with the evil race the Shadows- sure, I could say Trump is as evil as they are or compare them to Nazi Germany, but that’s kind of silly (I’m sure there is nothing political about the Shadows, they’re just evil, like the Borg or the Empire). And I might skip most of the stuff about the conflict between B5 and the Earth government- I don’t remember it involving stuff like a strong capitalist agenda or racism or something.
**Season 2, Episode 12 “Acts of Sacrifice”** See this for a plot summary.
There are about seven political issues here:
1) The Narn ambassador G’Kar tries to get support from Earth Alliance and the Minbari in their war with the Centauri. The ambassador from the Minbari is reluctant to see Minbar side with the Narn, partly because they were in a war just about 10 years earlier and she doesn’t want another war. And partly because they have reason to believe that if the war started going the Narns’ way, they might try to give the Centauri a dose of their own genocidal medicine. The Narn, who experienced a near-genocidal Centauri occupation when G’Kar was younger, seem to have adopted the slogan “Never Again” but sometimes sound like they might take it to the extreme of beating the Centauri race to death.
2) Tensions between the Narn and Centuri civilians on B5 are growing. In one incident a group of the latter are in a bar talking about how the Centauri Republic is now “great again” as a result of their war with the Narn. They go on to insult the Narn people. A group of Narn hear this and a fight almost starts.
3) A representative from an unfamiliar alien race comes to B5 to meet representatives of the Earth Alliance (Sheridan wants them either as allies, or as members of the League of Non-Aligned Worlds). It quickly becomes apparent that they believe they are superior and most other races are inferior.
At one point they talk about letting evolution take it’s course and letting races die off or profit without any interference such as medical help but they DO believe in medical help for their own people.
At another point they are shown the poor part of B5, where the population is mostly human. They admire what they see as a racial policy by humans of segregating the relatively inferior parts of humanity. Obviously B5 isn’t doing that but it’s interesting to see what seems like the writers of the show taking a swipe at the Earth Alliance and B5’s leadership for failing to create a utopia like the Federation in Star Trek (to a large degree the senior staff of B5 are more or less progressive but it seems like they’re dependent on Earth Alliance for funding and the poverty on Earth follows people to B5).
**Season 2 Episode 16 “In the Shadow of Z’Ha’Dum”** See this for a plot summary.
There are 1-2 political aspects to this episode. First, Captain Sheridan detains a man for questioning for more than 10 hours without charging him. The chief of security, after 10 hours, tries to convince him to let the guy go, and resigns when he won’t. As I’ve said before the chief of security seems like the least progressive of B5’s command staff and seems more concerned about getting in trouble than about the civil liberties issue involved. I’m tempted to say that this seriously erodes my opinion of Captain Sheridan as a progressive, but on the other hand, he was detaining the guy for non-political reasons. It wasn’t a case of political dissent or alleged criminal activity. His wife was lost on a space exploration mission and he had good reason to think that the detainee knew what really happened to her. It was still wrong to detain the guy but I find it less offensive than I would if it were about dissent or crime. He ends up admitting to the security chief that he (Sheridan) was wrong and says it won’t happen again.
The other political thing is that the government on Earth has created a “Ministry of Peace.” Initially it sounds like something almost progressive. But it turns out that it sees (political) division and dissent in the human population as a threat to peace. They depoliticize dissent and see it as a criminal or psychological problem and recruit people to report such behavior to them, so that dissidents can be “helped.” Even worse, this is an illegal and more or less right-wing government (it’s not super-clear, but if they continue some of the policies of the last President and you combine that with new actions and attitudes of the new regime, they’re fairly right-wing (especially if the more offensive senators are aligned with the new President and I don’t think there’s anything saying otherwise)). Below is the full transcript of the Ministry of Peace representative trying to recruit people:
MoP: In the last 10 years Earth has rebuilt it’s defenses magnificently. We can protect our people from physical harm. But is that enough? We cannot hope to make peace with other civilizations until we have found peace with ourselves. And that, quite simply, is what the Ministry of Peace is all about. Now as Babylon 5 has an early warning system to detect possible attacks, we at the Ministry of Peace have created a system of our own. We call it the Night Watch, named after those brave citizens who stood vigil in the darkness against possible enemies. It’s a completely volunteer organization, officially endorsed by Earth Dome [the government]. Members receive 50 credits per week above and beyond their regular salaries for services rendered.
POSSIBLE RECRUIT: What kind of services?
MoP: Mainly just to be present wearing the colors of the Night Watch. Raise public awareness, make them start thinking about peace, about the way they treat one another.
POSSIBLE RECRUIT 2: I can’t believe Earth would pay us 50 credits a week just to walk around the station.
MoP: Correct. As the name implies you must also be watchful. Peace can be made or broken with a gun, a word, an idea, even a thought. Now those who work against peace sow the seeds of discontent. They plant stories. They undermine the public good. It’s not because they are necessarily evil, it’s because they don’t know any better. They’re unhappy. And they lash out in the only way they can. So if we are made aware of these problems as they occur then we can find these people. We can talk to these people. We can embrace them in the arms of society while at the same time protecting society from misinformation and harmful ideas. We’re less interested in actions than we are in attitudes. We must help protect society against it’s own worst instincts. By taking these bold steps we will help to ensure a better future for everyone. I’m proud to be a part of it and I hope you’ll all join me in becoming part of the Night Watch.
**Season 2 Episode 18 “Confessions and Lamentations”** See this for a plot summary.
Although I might not change this, when I wrote (in the intros to these reviews) that Babylon 5 wasn’t as progressive as Star Trek, I was thinking partly of the issue of gay rights. Neither ST nor B5 have any LGBT characters (well, ST kind of does, in the MIRROR UNIVERSE but that’s only about .3% of all the Star Trek episodes and B5 MIGHT have one character who is both male and female but it’s unclear and only comes up very briefly in one episode (he only outs himself to one person, who seems uncomfortable with it)). But ST drops some hints in at least 4 episodes that homophobia is wrong. I know that in the 1980s homophobia was a big part of our nation’s response to HIV/AIDS and I think that it’s probably been a slowly declining part of it since then. With that in mind, B5 DID do (in 1995) an episode basically about HIV/AIDS.
It’s revealed that an alien race, the Markab, are experiencing a deadly plague. At one point Dr. Franklin compares the response of the Markab to the plague with the heterosexual population's response to HIV/AIDS.
After he learns about the plague, he has a conversation with a Markab doctor who had been trying to cover it up. Three of the Markab doctor’s comments are worth quoting directly.
“It is not something we talk about…. The disease only appeared once before. Centuries ago. On a small island on our world, noted for certain excesses. When it was struck down, the rest of my people believed it was a punishment by the gods for their lack of morality.”
“The first new case of Drafa [the plague] was detected nearly a year ago. The family was so scandalized by it that they lied about what killed him.”
“Some of us have been working to find a cure without enough money or resources. They [the government] don’t want to talk about it, as if the very subject makes them dirty.”
In the end, it appears that at least 99% of the Markab population is dead. And they might have found a cure if not for their hostility towards those they considered immoral.
**Season 2 Episode 22 “The Fall of Night”** See this for a plot summary.
We learn towards the beginning that the Centuari have been attacking some of the space and planets of it’s neighbors. Their ambassador claims it is to create a buffer zone around the space of the Centauris and claims it will reduce tension and war, which makes no sense. Even if the races attacked DON’T go to war with the Centauri immediately it’s unlikely they will resume normal relations with their invader before many years have passed and they will make arrangements to repel any more attacks, which will mean a lot of military forces close to the areas seized for the buffer zone.
Most of this episode is about the growing schism between B5 and the Earth Alliance. Two representatives of the Ministry of Peace (one from the Night Watch (I say a lot about it in the second review in this post)) come aboard B5 to talk with various ambassadors. The one who leads the Night Watch has an interesting conversation with a recurring minor character in the security force who is a (dissenting) member of NW. The MoP leader uses the word sedition to refer to the threat being dealt with by the NW, and mentioned the following examples: A) a store owner who felt that the regulations for imports were “nuts;” B) dock-workers consistently late for work (allegedly affecting efficiency); C) poor residents of B5 talking to reporters about poverty there and back on Earth (finally evidence that the new regime brought in by a hidden coup is capitalist); D) and lastly two more shop owners openly criticizing presidential decisions.
This next subject over-laps with the last one, but there is a lot about the Centauri-Narn conflict. I sometimes encounter minor topics that I decide to skip and in recent episodes there have been a few things about that conflict that I want to mention here. First, when the Centauri (strategically helped by the evil Shadows) find the Narn Homeworld unguarded, they bombard it from orbit with things called “mass drivers” which are banned by practically everyone except the Centauri. Here and there the B5 command staff have been fairly sympathetic to the Narn side of things, and with good reason. The last time the Centauri occupied Narn planets and space it was genocidal and after the first time a Narn outpost is occupied by the Centauri in this series (season 2, episode 9), initially the latter wanted to keep the civilian population for forced labor (they only abandon that plan when faced with a threat by Earth to send observers).
In this episode, a Narn heavy cruiser that somehow survived the defeat of Narn by the Centauri comes to B5 seeking sanctuary. After that, the leader of the MoP tells Sheridan that Earth has successfully negotiated a non-aggression treaty with the Centauri. A member of the NW who is stationed in Command and Control reports the hidden presence of the ship. A Centauri warship shows up and ends up being destroyed by B5 while the Narn escape.
At the end of the episode, two things happen: 1) the Centauri invade more space of the League of Non-Aligned Worlds races, and 2) a shop-keeper is taken away by NW members.
Monday, March 28, 2011
Peter King, Muslims, Torture, and N. Ireland
(UPDATE 5/22/14 I finally did a post going into why I believe it's inacurate to describe the IRA as "terrorists" and it's here)
Peter King, a GOP US Representative from New York, has been a big supporter of Irish Republicanism and specifically Sinn Fein and NORAID, an American group suspected in the past of supporting the IRA, although it might be a lot more accurate to say that they supported and today support SF. He is very conservative and has expressed support for the use (in the War on Terror, in Iraq, and Afghanistan) of interrogation techniques that are torture (for example, see this and this). He has also spear-headed congressional hearings on the alleged radicalization of American Muslims (see this, this and this)
In the 2nd link from the bottom of the above paragraph, is a post on the blog of the Southern Poverty Law Center. In the discussion (which was deleted when they started using a different system for comments) I spent a lot of time explaining that the IRA was/is not a terrorist organization- people thought King was a bigoted hypocrite because he supported the IRA’s campaign but is hostile to groups like Al-Qaeda which a lot of people think are comparable to the IRA. Although this doesn’t have anything to do with the question of terrorism, in another way it’s relevant to point out that there are many things indicating that the IRA over the last 30 years or so has been more or less left-wing (it's probably safe to assume that, for example, if a majority of SF members are anti-homophobic, a similar majority of IRA members are anti-homophobic) (for some examples of that see most of the first half of this).
As I explain here, only about .2% of the IRA's operations intentionally resulted in civilian death, and only about .1% unintentionally resulted in civilian death. I think it's likely that no more than .1% of their operations were unsuccessfully aimed at killing civilians.
When the IRA were bombing commercial property, they always (or at least almost always something like 99% of the time) planned on issuing a warning. Something like 99% of the time the warning was issued, the target was evacuated and no one was killed. The goal of such operations was at least partly to inflict financial damage on the business community who, it was hoped, would then pressure the British government to withdraw from Ireland. They were probably also often aimed at demonstrating that the IRA was not beaten when the British would often claim that they were. Bombings of non-military government property were aimed at disrupting government operations, and putting pressure directly on the government (warnings were always or almost always issued and civilians were evacuated). The issuing of warnings in these two categories, and the tiny % of the time that they intentionally killed civilians and the fact that somewhere around 2/3 of their operations were aimed at the security forces, all indicate that some very large % of IRA members and leaders were not into terrorizing civilians.
I can understand people wanting to expose King as the bigoted hypocrite he is, but doing so by calling the IRA terrorists is just not accurate or helpful. What would be a great approach would be to focus on the issue of torture- torture used by the US or it’s allies in recent years, and the torture used by the British in the early 1970s in N. Ireland. King LOVES water-boarding and in general approves of the torture techniques used by the US. I know that some methods have been used in both situations. I’m not as familiar with the details as I could be and I’m not capable right now of engaging in an off-line discussions with journalists, or debate with supporters of King. But I figure some of you, or someone that one of you knows will want to have the information ready to attack King over his bigoted hypocrisy. The thing is, you can find a lot of info about the Irish part of this in a book that is (mostly) available on-line here. Although the author was very partisan as a republican, his book seems to be well respected as the web-site it’s on is very neutral and academic, and about 1/3 of the information the site offers on the subject of internment in the early 1970s was written by him.
UPDATE 5/31/11 I'm still not feeling like reading the book linked to right above to refresh my memory and learn some new details. But while reading another very good source, I found a brief description of the "sensory deprivation" techniques used on eleven of the internees during seven days. According to Michael Farrell's "Northern Ireland: The Orange State" (page 283) they were hooded the entire time; they were completely isolated, and didn't know where they were; they were severely beaten; they were forced to stand spread-eagled against walls until they collapsed; they were given hardly any food; they were subjected to "white noise;" they were prevented from sleeping. The book also refers to another torture technique used on the internees in general (apparently not the 11 I just referred to). That was taking hooded internees up in helicopters, and then, when the helicopter comes back down to something like 3-5 feet above the ground, the internee is pushed out, thinking that he's much higher up than he is. Sounds like water-boarding.
If King’s bigoted hypocrisy is highlighted and becomes an issue in America, that will make it very likely that Sinn Fein will tell him to go away. If they do that publicly, it will, to some small degree, probably affect how much support he has. Also, it will probably result in Sinn Fein changing their approach to generating support in America (in a way that both SF and the American left will benefit from).
In any case, I hope this was worth your time to read- I really think that King can be hammered on this. And maybe you or someone you know will be able to use the information about torture in N. Ireland.
Tom
UPDATE 10/8/12 Apparently there was some use of waterboarding by the security forces in N. Ireland. See this and this.
UPDATE 4/22/18 In the 1990 dramatic movie "Hidden Agenda," there is an allegation of what we now call water-boarding. I'm not sure where the writer(s) got that from, but I am also pretty sure that condemning water boarding wasn't back then the popular cause that it has been in the last 15 or so years (in the movie, they don't use the phrase "water boarding") and I wouldn't be surprised if the writer(s) included it not because they wanted to take a swipe at George W. Bush etc. but because they did some research about what torture techniques the British used in N. Ireland and found some references to that one.
Peter King, a GOP US Representative from New York, has been a big supporter of Irish Republicanism and specifically Sinn Fein and NORAID, an American group suspected in the past of supporting the IRA, although it might be a lot more accurate to say that they supported and today support SF. He is very conservative and has expressed support for the use (in the War on Terror, in Iraq, and Afghanistan) of interrogation techniques that are torture (for example, see this and this). He has also spear-headed congressional hearings on the alleged radicalization of American Muslims (see this, this and this)
In the 2nd link from the bottom of the above paragraph, is a post on the blog of the Southern Poverty Law Center. In the discussion (which was deleted when they started using a different system for comments) I spent a lot of time explaining that the IRA was/is not a terrorist organization- people thought King was a bigoted hypocrite because he supported the IRA’s campaign but is hostile to groups like Al-Qaeda which a lot of people think are comparable to the IRA. Although this doesn’t have anything to do with the question of terrorism, in another way it’s relevant to point out that there are many things indicating that the IRA over the last 30 years or so has been more or less left-wing (it's probably safe to assume that, for example, if a majority of SF members are anti-homophobic, a similar majority of IRA members are anti-homophobic) (for some examples of that see most of the first half of this).
As I explain here, only about .2% of the IRA's operations intentionally resulted in civilian death, and only about .1% unintentionally resulted in civilian death. I think it's likely that no more than .1% of their operations were unsuccessfully aimed at killing civilians.
When the IRA were bombing commercial property, they always (or at least almost always something like 99% of the time) planned on issuing a warning. Something like 99% of the time the warning was issued, the target was evacuated and no one was killed. The goal of such operations was at least partly to inflict financial damage on the business community who, it was hoped, would then pressure the British government to withdraw from Ireland. They were probably also often aimed at demonstrating that the IRA was not beaten when the British would often claim that they were. Bombings of non-military government property were aimed at disrupting government operations, and putting pressure directly on the government (warnings were always or almost always issued and civilians were evacuated). The issuing of warnings in these two categories, and the tiny % of the time that they intentionally killed civilians and the fact that somewhere around 2/3 of their operations were aimed at the security forces, all indicate that some very large % of IRA members and leaders were not into terrorizing civilians.
I can understand people wanting to expose King as the bigoted hypocrite he is, but doing so by calling the IRA terrorists is just not accurate or helpful. What would be a great approach would be to focus on the issue of torture- torture used by the US or it’s allies in recent years, and the torture used by the British in the early 1970s in N. Ireland. King LOVES water-boarding and in general approves of the torture techniques used by the US. I know that some methods have been used in both situations. I’m not as familiar with the details as I could be and I’m not capable right now of engaging in an off-line discussions with journalists, or debate with supporters of King. But I figure some of you, or someone that one of you knows will want to have the information ready to attack King over his bigoted hypocrisy. The thing is, you can find a lot of info about the Irish part of this in a book that is (mostly) available on-line here. Although the author was very partisan as a republican, his book seems to be well respected as the web-site it’s on is very neutral and academic, and about 1/3 of the information the site offers on the subject of internment in the early 1970s was written by him.
UPDATE 5/31/11 I'm still not feeling like reading the book linked to right above to refresh my memory and learn some new details. But while reading another very good source, I found a brief description of the "sensory deprivation" techniques used on eleven of the internees during seven days. According to Michael Farrell's "Northern Ireland: The Orange State" (page 283) they were hooded the entire time; they were completely isolated, and didn't know where they were; they were severely beaten; they were forced to stand spread-eagled against walls until they collapsed; they were given hardly any food; they were subjected to "white noise;" they were prevented from sleeping. The book also refers to another torture technique used on the internees in general (apparently not the 11 I just referred to). That was taking hooded internees up in helicopters, and then, when the helicopter comes back down to something like 3-5 feet above the ground, the internee is pushed out, thinking that he's much higher up than he is. Sounds like water-boarding.
If King’s bigoted hypocrisy is highlighted and becomes an issue in America, that will make it very likely that Sinn Fein will tell him to go away. If they do that publicly, it will, to some small degree, probably affect how much support he has. Also, it will probably result in Sinn Fein changing their approach to generating support in America (in a way that both SF and the American left will benefit from).
In any case, I hope this was worth your time to read- I really think that King can be hammered on this. And maybe you or someone you know will be able to use the information about torture in N. Ireland.
Tom
UPDATE 10/8/12 Apparently there was some use of waterboarding by the security forces in N. Ireland. See this and this.
UPDATE 4/22/18 In the 1990 dramatic movie "Hidden Agenda," there is an allegation of what we now call water-boarding. I'm not sure where the writer(s) got that from, but I am also pretty sure that condemning water boarding wasn't back then the popular cause that it has been in the last 15 or so years (in the movie, they don't use the phrase "water boarding") and I wouldn't be surprised if the writer(s) included it not because they wanted to take a swipe at George W. Bush etc. but because they did some research about what torture techniques the British used in N. Ireland and found some references to that one.
Friday, October 22, 2010
Glenn Beck, American Unity, Capitalist Exploitation
Yesterday I submitted some comments for two blog posts at Hatewatch, the blog of the Southern Poverty Law Center.
The first one was about how workers are exploited. What I said I'm sure has been said better by others, but I have never seen an explanation of exploitation like this one. I think it's pretty good and might be helpful for people.
The post is here. A few things I need to clarify about my comments:
1. When I talk about workers exerting themselves, I mean PHYSICALLY exerting themselves.
2. Of course the wealth re-distribution of progressive taxation involves funding stuff like free universal health-care, free day-care, etc.
3. The figure of 300 (actually something like 100-400 is a better way of putting it) only makes sense with national corporations; with small businesses 20 is probably much more accurate and small business owners probably work more than their employees do (in general, what I'm talking about doesn't apply much to small businesses (there are certainly plenty of exceptions where it DOES apply), depending on how you define small- I lean towards saying it's 1 to somewhere around 50 employees)
Here's the comment:
"
Tom Shelley said,
on October 21st, 2010 at 11:57 am
A response to Rick Nettleton:
How have Democrats contributed to hate? You seem to think that Democratic hate for conservatives is comparable to the hatred against Muslims, LGBT people. I mean the problem with the Tea Party isn’t that they hate liberals, it’s the racism, and homophobia and anti-muslim bigotry. You can’t compare that with hating conservatives.
No, corporations and rich people are not paying their share of taxes. They can easily give more and still live better than the rest of us. Progressive taxation is an important way to re-distribute wealth. And why is it necessary to do so? Because to one degree or another, workers are exploited by the bosses. The details differ a bit from job to job, but for the most part, workers are exerting themselves A LOT more than the people at the top of the corporation; they’re also using their heads almost as much as those at the top. And yet the people at the top make about 300 times more than the workers at the bottom. That is obscene.
As far as business and the nation’s wealth- 1) the WORKERS are responsible for building this country and 2) that wealth is not enjoyed by the overwhelming majority of the population.
Tom"
The second comment is here. Some things I need to clarify:
1. The 9.12 project is partly based on the following (from the 9.12 website, here):
"This is a non-political movement. The 9-12 Project is designed to bring us all back to the place we were on September 12, 2001. The day after America was attacked we were not obsessed with Red States, Blue States or political parties. We were united as Americans, standing together to protect the greatest nation ever created.
That same feeling – that commitment to country is what we are hoping to foster with this idea. We want to get everyone thinking like it is September 12th, 2001 again."
Here's the comment:
"
#
Tom Shelley said,
on October 21st, 2010 at 11:26 pm
Some thoughts on the 9.12 project:
I hadn’t heard of it beforte this post (I am not following current events and politics as much as I should). I looked at the web-site and I find the idea of Glenn Beck promoting civic unity and bringing Americans together ridiculous. First there is what he has been saying recently (see http://mediamatters.org/search/index?qstring=glenn+beck&x=0&y=0 for some good examples (certainly his talk of hunting progressives the same way Israel went after Nazis)). I mean, he called Obama an anti-white racist and now he wants us to all come together? Then, as far as the spirit of American unity since 9/11 we have plenty of evidence that a new McCarthyism took over the political right, as The Progressive has docuemented at- http://www.progressive.org/list/mccarthy?page=18 .We have Coulter writing a book that calls all liberals/leftists traitors. She said that the American Taliban (the teenager captured sjortly after 9/11) should be executed because she believes that liberals need to be physically intimidated.
During WWII the UK had a coalitiion government because they saw that in that war they needed unity. Bush could have had a few cabinet positions given to Democrats (Cllinton, in the late 1990s when we were NOT in a major and prolonged war, had a Republican for a Secretary of Defense) but he didn’t, and instead used 9/11 to push his radical agenda.
i think I’m missing ione more element of this, but I think I’ve made my point. It’s a joke for Beck to talk about unity.
Tom"
The first one was about how workers are exploited. What I said I'm sure has been said better by others, but I have never seen an explanation of exploitation like this one. I think it's pretty good and might be helpful for people.
The post is here. A few things I need to clarify about my comments:
1. When I talk about workers exerting themselves, I mean PHYSICALLY exerting themselves.
2. Of course the wealth re-distribution of progressive taxation involves funding stuff like free universal health-care, free day-care, etc.
3. The figure of 300 (actually something like 100-400 is a better way of putting it) only makes sense with national corporations; with small businesses 20 is probably much more accurate and small business owners probably work more than their employees do (in general, what I'm talking about doesn't apply much to small businesses (there are certainly plenty of exceptions where it DOES apply), depending on how you define small- I lean towards saying it's 1 to somewhere around 50 employees)
Here's the comment:
"
Tom Shelley said,
on October 21st, 2010 at 11:57 am
A response to Rick Nettleton:
How have Democrats contributed to hate? You seem to think that Democratic hate for conservatives is comparable to the hatred against Muslims, LGBT people. I mean the problem with the Tea Party isn’t that they hate liberals, it’s the racism, and homophobia and anti-muslim bigotry. You can’t compare that with hating conservatives.
No, corporations and rich people are not paying their share of taxes. They can easily give more and still live better than the rest of us. Progressive taxation is an important way to re-distribute wealth. And why is it necessary to do so? Because to one degree or another, workers are exploited by the bosses. The details differ a bit from job to job, but for the most part, workers are exerting themselves A LOT more than the people at the top of the corporation; they’re also using their heads almost as much as those at the top. And yet the people at the top make about 300 times more than the workers at the bottom. That is obscene.
As far as business and the nation’s wealth- 1) the WORKERS are responsible for building this country and 2) that wealth is not enjoyed by the overwhelming majority of the population.
Tom"
The second comment is here. Some things I need to clarify:
1. The 9.12 project is partly based on the following (from the 9.12 website, here):
"This is a non-political movement. The 9-12 Project is designed to bring us all back to the place we were on September 12, 2001. The day after America was attacked we were not obsessed with Red States, Blue States or political parties. We were united as Americans, standing together to protect the greatest nation ever created.
That same feeling – that commitment to country is what we are hoping to foster with this idea. We want to get everyone thinking like it is September 12th, 2001 again."
Here's the comment:
"
#
Tom Shelley said,
on October 21st, 2010 at 11:26 pm
Some thoughts on the 9.12 project:
I hadn’t heard of it beforte this post (I am not following current events and politics as much as I should). I looked at the web-site and I find the idea of Glenn Beck promoting civic unity and bringing Americans together ridiculous. First there is what he has been saying recently (see http://mediamatters.org/search/index?qstring=glenn+beck&x=0&y=0 for some good examples (certainly his talk of hunting progressives the same way Israel went after Nazis)). I mean, he called Obama an anti-white racist and now he wants us to all come together? Then, as far as the spirit of American unity since 9/11 we have plenty of evidence that a new McCarthyism took over the political right, as The Progressive has docuemented at- http://www.progressive.org/list/mccarthy?page=18 .We have Coulter writing a book that calls all liberals/leftists traitors. She said that the American Taliban (the teenager captured sjortly after 9/11) should be executed because she believes that liberals need to be physically intimidated.
During WWII the UK had a coalitiion government because they saw that in that war they needed unity. Bush could have had a few cabinet positions given to Democrats (Cllinton, in the late 1990s when we were NOT in a major and prolonged war, had a Republican for a Secretary of Defense) but he didn’t, and instead used 9/11 to push his radical agenda.
i think I’m missing ione more element of this, but I think I’ve made my point. It’s a joke for Beck to talk about unity.
Tom"
Friday, November 27, 2009
Star Trek: The Next Generation Reviews W
This is one of my posts where I “review” Star Trek episodes. I will be giving each one a star rating. I sometimes will make some comments about non-political parts of them that I like or don’t like. I’ll sometimes use the issues raised in the episode to discuss similar issues in real life. And I will sometimes simply high-light the progressive politics of ST. ST is in-line with the three original themes of this blog, as I explain in the first ST post where I offer some general thoughts about ST.
I’m not very familiar with The Original Series and there might be some small amount of material there that would affect what I say about Star Trek (i.e. how often religion is mentioned)
Lastly. multi-culturalism is such a pervasive theme in ST that I only comment on it when it goes beyond the norm (i.e. inter-species partners).
“The Drumhead” See this for a plot summary.
This episode is basically about political witch-hunts, there’s a lot of good stuff from Picard about that sort of thing. It reminds me of something close to that issue, and that is how dissidents in America have been treated since 9/11. The Progressive magazine has a great section they’ve been doing since December ‘01 which keeps track of stories of a new “War on Terror” McCarthyism. It’s here.
I give it four stars out of five.
“Half A Life” See this for a plot summary.
More or less a non-political episode, but I will briefly state that the “Resolution” is wrong (of course).
I give it two stars out of five.
“The Host” See this for a plot summary.
There’s one bit of environmentalism in this episode.
I usually don’t bother with this kind of comment but in this case it’s just too much- things Trill in this episode are very different from how they are on Deep Space Nine. Partly because of that, I can give this episode only one star out of five.
“The Mind’s Eye” See this for a plot summary.
A non-political episode. I give it three stars out five.
I’m not very familiar with The Original Series and there might be some small amount of material there that would affect what I say about Star Trek (i.e. how often religion is mentioned)
Lastly. multi-culturalism is such a pervasive theme in ST that I only comment on it when it goes beyond the norm (i.e. inter-species partners).
“The Drumhead” See this for a plot summary.
This episode is basically about political witch-hunts, there’s a lot of good stuff from Picard about that sort of thing. It reminds me of something close to that issue, and that is how dissidents in America have been treated since 9/11. The Progressive magazine has a great section they’ve been doing since December ‘01 which keeps track of stories of a new “War on Terror” McCarthyism. It’s here.
I give it four stars out of five.
“Half A Life” See this for a plot summary.
More or less a non-political episode, but I will briefly state that the “Resolution” is wrong (of course).
I give it two stars out of five.
“The Host” See this for a plot summary.
There’s one bit of environmentalism in this episode.
I usually don’t bother with this kind of comment but in this case it’s just too much- things Trill in this episode are very different from how they are on Deep Space Nine. Partly because of that, I can give this episode only one star out of five.
“The Mind’s Eye” See this for a plot summary.
A non-political episode. I give it three stars out five.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)