Volunteer Tailgate Party
Hope it's not too late to point to Big Orange Michael's renewal of the old tradition of the Volunteer Tailgate Party, featuring some of the best recent posts by Tennessee and ex-Tennessee bloggers. Thanks Michael!
posted by Thomas Nephew at 11:44:00 PM -- |    

 
On the outskirts of the inauguration
I wound up dyeing a pillowcase black for the hood, and made the remaining accessories from several long black pipecleaners from my little girl's art supplies. With the poncho I'd got at an army surplus store and a crappy little "Four more years!" sign I taped to it, I was ready to go, but it was a late start, about 11am.

I got off the Metro at Union Station, and made my way towards Pennsylvania Avenue. Knots of policemen and boy scouts -- quite a disquieting touch, I thought -- directed the foot traffic down a parallel street. I hadn't had a very clear idea how to get to 4th and Pennsylvania; I saw now that I probably wasn't going to.

My hopes picked up when I saw a tent with a large throng of demonstrators in front. A way through! The formalities of being frisked and wanded seemed a reasonable price to pay, the crowd was large but so was that tent -- surely I'd be through shortly. I joined the crowd, and was soon immersed in chants -- "hey hey, ho ho," etc. Which I've never liked, so I didn't join in. But I'll admit it would have been a quiet, slow old time without them, because I never really got very close to that tent, which began to seem more like a crowd control stage prop than a functioning gateway after half an hour or so.

While the crowd was mainly sporting signs like "My president is a corporate whore" -- my favorite, maybe because the woman holding it had such a sunny smile to go with it -- not everyone was demonstrating against Bush. At one point a boyish fellow jumped up onto one of the traffic barriers channeling us toward the tent, arranged his fingers in a "W," and shouted some slogans of his own. The chant leaders switched to a new slogan about abortion rights. "Save the soldiers, kill the babies," muttered a middle-aged woman near me with a short bitter laugh. Her companion rolled his eyes, snorted a little, said nothing.

I saw that people were just walking by the lines I was in, and decided to try my luck wherever they were headed. That took me down to near 7th and C, where things got a little dicier. A group came marching down the street waving red and black flags, turned the corner, and were lost from my view -- if I'd had one, I had the hood on as they went by. I then made what was nearly a bad mistake and followed them -- in time to see several PVC pipes and assorted other sticks (used to hold banners) tossed high in the air and towards a line of police. I believe I said "Oh boy."

The police responded promptly, forming a line and sweeping the demonstrators back down the street -- towards me. I saw one policewoman squirt a little bottle of something at one demonstrator, and saw another get a bit of a charge out of pushing people with his nightstick. I got jammed against a wall, and then pushed up the street and around the corner with the rest of the crowd.

But to the relief of most of us, the confrontation fizzled pretty quickly, and I was soon able to drift back to where I'd been, near a second tent-entrance to the Pennsylvania Avenue zone. When the police made some last adjustments to how they wanted the crowd positioned a group of Republicans finally had a go ahead to proceed to wherever they were headed. My hood and sign earned me a few chickenshit shoves from the fur and cowboy hat set as they passed by.

I settled in for just standing at the intersection, as a mix of demonstrators and Bush supporters milled by. I got photographed a few times (it seemed like just about every other person had a digital camera along) asked what I was about a few times, and whether it bothered me that some people seemed to think I was for Bush; I just said "I think most people get it."

I can report that having a hood on for any length of time is fairly unsettling -- and my black pillowcase let through some light, so it wasn't the real deal. You develop a feeling that something is about to happen to you, and you keep seeing something in the corner of your eye -- it's just the hood of course, but it's hard not to keep turning to see what "it" is. I preferred to look up toward the sky for light. Up there, helicopters flew patrol. Down here, a huddled mass of demonstrators ranted impotently against victors all but oblivious to them, well beyond the barriers between us. I'm satisfied that I went, but it was kind of a sad day, all in all.


=====
UPDATE, 2/10: Natalie Davis and Tim Dunlop had similar experiences, at least as far as not getting very close to much of anything. I kept meaning to mention this before now, but never got around to a "followups" post. posted by Thomas Nephew at 2:20:00 AM -- |    

 
Inauguration: bring your poncho
Advice for ticket holders from the Inauguration of the President website:

Attendees should check the local weather forecast for Inauguration Day and plan accordingly. In the event of rain, umbrellas will not be permitted within the security perimeter. It is recommended that attendees bring ponchos, or rain coats.

Not a bad idea, even for those of us just milling around on the mall, in Metro stations, or along Pennsylvania Avenue. Signs seem to arouse suspicion, but surely a "Four More Years" badge of some kind will build a bridge of trust. Still not sure what I'll wear for headgear, though.

Inauguration information:

• Map: street closings and parade route
• www.counterinauguralball.org
• A Wide Variety of Protest Planned for Inauguration, Washington Post, 1/13/2005:

  ANSWER plans a 9 a.m. rally at John Marshall Park, Fourth Street and Pennsylvania Avenue NW, where members said they would erect bleachers of their own.

  Yeah, it's ANSWER, next time you organize things.

posted by Thomas Nephew at 9:25:00 PM -- |    

 
How about that: Spanish Catholic church backs condom use
MSNBC:

In a substantial shift from traditional policy, the Catholic Church in Spain has said it supports the use of condoms to prevent the spread of AIDS.

“Condoms have a place in the global prevention of AIDS,” Juan Antonio Martinez Campos, spokesman for the Spanish Bishops Conference, told reporters after a meeting Tuesday with Health Minister Elena Salgado to discuss ways of fighting the disease.

ˇEs un milagro!


=====
UPDATE, 1/21: The Vatican is not amused. Denis Barnett of AFP, via AEGiS: "A senior Vatican prelate, Bishop Jose Luis Redrado Machite, told AFP the use of condoms was "contrary to Catholic morality". [...] He added that he felt Camino had merely been voicing that view, not advocating the use of the prophylactic."
UPDATE, 1/24: Never mind. From a followup AFP report, again via AEGiS: Spanish Church officials and the Vatican, however, quickly stepped in to set the record straight, saying the Roman Catholic Church remained opposed to the use of condoms and that doctrine remained the same. posted by Thomas Nephew at 6:17:00 PM -- |    

 
P.J. O'Jerk
Ted Barlow of Crooked Timber draws attention to a particularly vile piece of work by P. J. O'Rourke. Mr. P.J. constructs an "Alternative Inaugural Address" imagining that because it was mainly (ed.: but not only) Bush opponents who object to posting the Ten Commandments in courthouses, said opponents must be "jerks" who oppose the Ten Commandments themselves.

Not content with this puerile bit of reasoning, P.J., speaking through his prophet George W. Bush, works his way down the list adding one idiocy after the other:

Thou shalt not commit adultery." The jerks have begun praising marriage lately. But only if the bride and groom each have a beard. [...]

"Thou shalt not steal." In 2004 the United States government spent $2,318,800,000,000. Thus every American benefited from $7,919.37 worth of federal services. Let me ask the jerks something. Say you're average jerks, a "blended family" of four. Did you pay $31,677.48 in taxes last year? If you didn't, you took things from other Americans. What did you give in return? [...]

And then there is the Tenth Commandment. "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor anything that is thy neighbor's."

The Tenth Commandment sends a message to all the jerks who want redistribution of wealth, higher taxes, more government programs, more government regulation, more government, less free enterprise, and less freedom. And the message is clear and concise: Go to hell.

After you, P.J.! The zinger he was probably proudest of, though, was this one:

"Thou shalt not kill." Why, in the opinion of jerks, is it wrong to kill a baby but all right to kill a baby that's so little he hasn't been born yet? And why do the same jerks who favor abortion oppose the death penalty? We can imagine people so full of loving kindness that they can accept neither the abortionist nor the executioner. We can even imagine people so cold-hearted that they embrace them both. But it takes a real jerk to argue in favor of killing perfect innocents and letting Terry Nichols live.

O.K.: why, in the opinion of jerks, is it wrong to force a corporation to give up its God-given right to do whatever the hell it pleases, but right to compel a woman to carry a multi-celled zygote to term? Why, in the opinion of jerks, is it right to confuse the issue of state-sanctioned vengeance killing with the private decision, medical or otherwise, of a single woman? I can imagine people so full of concern for cellular life that they feel the need to dictate decisions about it to others. But it takes P.J. O'Jerk to spew that all over the pages of the Weekly Standard -- and think he's being witty. posted by Thomas Nephew at 6:13:00 PM -- |    

 
A quick note to my Senators

I'm writing to urge you to vote against Alberto Gonzales for Attorney General. His dishonorable position on torture and his dangerous position on executive branch privileges make him unfit for such an important position.

Thank you.

Probably should have done better than that, but it will have to do -- Talkleft notes that the vote to confirm Gonzales may come this week, and even before the inauguration on Thursday. To my astonishment, even Senator Kennedy has only said he "may" vote against Gonzales. This is a slam dunk, folks. Vote "no" or be an accomplice to confirming a nebbish who just follows orders.

Next stops: DNC web site, and Senator Harry Reid.


=====
UPDATE, 1/19: Sunday 1/16 Washington Post editorial against Gonzales posted by Thomas Nephew at 1:30:00 AM -- |    

 
What do you believe is true even though you cannot prove it?
That's the question posed by John Brockman, the publisher of the scientific website edge.org, to 120 scientists and thinkers. As Brockman writes, many answers have to do with the nature (and even the primacy) of consciousness, but even within this topic there are a number of interesting variations and contrasts. For example:

Joseph Ledoux (neuroscientist, New York University)

For me, this is an easy question. I believe that animals have feelings and other states of consciousness, but neither I, nor anyone else, has been able to prove it. We can't even prove that other people are conscious, much less other animals.

Daniel C. Dennett (philosopher, Tufts University):

I believe, but cannot yet prove, that acquiring a human language (an oral or sign language) is a necessary precondition for consciousness–in the strong sense of there being a subject, an I, a 'something it is like something to be.' It would follow that non-human animals and pre-linguistic children, although they can be sensitive, alert, responsive to pain and suffering, and cognitively competent in many remarkable ways–including ways that exceed normal adult human competence–are not really conscious (in this strong sense): there is no organized subject (yet) to be the enjoyer or sufferer, no owner of the experiences as contrasted with a mere cerebral locus of effects.

That's very hard for me to believe about many dogs and cats I've known, but I can't prove Dennett wrong, either, so let that go. I'll be back to look at more answers, this is one of the more interesting sites I've run across lately. Via a great "Links Dump" post by Chad Orzel; see other finds of his there, especially "Read Your Signature on the Scattered Ashes," about the stories that your possessions tell about you, and particularly the ones intentionally kept items tell about you. posted by Thomas Nephew at 1:03:00 AM -- |    

 
One world unravels, another gains strength
The L.A. Times is knocking at the Pulitzer door again with "A World Unravels," by staff writers Evelyn Iritani, Marla Dickerson, Tyler Marshall, and others. It's a compelling series on a subject that, at first glance, seems guaranteed to make your eyes glaze over: the end of international textile trade quotas known as the "Multi Fibre Arrangement" (MFA) of 1974 and a 1995 followup "Agreement on Textiles and Clothing" (ATC). The blurb to a world map graphic displaying winners and losers is as good a summary as any of the series:

For thirty years, a complex system of quotas allowed richer nations to control access to their textile and apparel markets, and spread orders around the world. The last of those quotas expired Jan. 1, and production is already shifting to countries such as China and India.

All else being equal, of course, maybe all this should mean is "congratulations" to China and India. But all else is seldom equal, and this is no exception. It's tempting to excerpt each of these reports, but I'll try to briefly summarize the articles instead, and then spend more of my time and yours wondering what, if anything, the decent response should be.

Clothes Will Cost Less, but Some Nations Pay: China and India will win out mainly because of their huge labor pools and economies of scale. But this concentrated success will come at the dispersed expense of many countries that founded fledgling industries on niches provided by the MFA and ATC.

Modern Facilities Give China's Competitiveness a New Edge: It's not quite so simple as that; China's ascendance isn't just a matter of "the sweatshops, low wages and long hours that many Americans associate with the "Made in China" label," Tyler Marshall reports. Local high-quality cotton, high tech prowess, a burgeoning network of domestic suppliers, and good infrastructure matter, too.

When Fear Follows Fabric Along the Assembly Line looks at the specific impact of the end of the quota system on third world women from Lesotho to Honduras to Bangladesh. For varied reasons, the textile industry has often wound up employing women, and that has had profound impacts in many of the countries now watching those jobs migrate to China and India. Take Bangladesh, where I'll break my rule and pull a quote that might give even the most committed American free-trader a bit of pause:

Emboldened by their economic independence, female garment workers in Bangladesh have resisted the efforts of conservative religious leaders to force them back into their homes. They have learned to read and write, sent their daughters to school and sparked a boom in the cosmetics industry.

"One of the things that helped us progress in Bangladesh and kept us a relatively moderate Muslim country is the recognition of women's economic roles and women as industrial workers and breadwinners," said Naila Kabeer, a Bangladesh native and an economist at the Institute of Development Studies in Sussex, England.

Globalization at all costs? The moderating influence of working Muslim women in that particular society may be coming to an end, unless Bangladesh can either continue to compete in textiles or find new industries and businesses for its workers. True, maybe Bangladeshi women won't give up their new found economic roles easily. But they may not have a choice.

Made in L.A., for Now and Far-Off Mauritius in Local Territory are a pair: L.A.'s own garment industry has found a niche cranking out expensive, fashionable jeans and other clothing as quickly as the fashions change; Mauritius has been trying to do the same. But L.A.'s head start in concentrating esoteric design, stitching, and manufacturing skills is eroding quarter by quarter both to China and to newcomers like Mauritius, which sees the "L.A." niche as its way out and up, too.

Workers' Rights at Risk: Multinational companies are able to pick and choose the cheapest labor pools to staff their textile and apparel factories -- and cheapest can often mean weakest. With China ahead in the "race to the bottom" of worker's rights, countries like Lesotho or El Salvador are essentially penalized by factory closures for not following suit. Wal-Mart in particular exerts huge pressure on the market to take advantage of the globally lowest production costs. But some companies like Gap and Nike -- stung by sweatshop criticism in the 1990s -- are taking a different tack and working for workers' rights, on the theory that quality and turnover problems are thereby reduced.*

So what do I think?
I was afraid you'd ask me that. There seem like a number of competing "narratives" here, to use that kind of jargon. There's the story, arguably, of a world market snapping back into its natural shape after years of distortion. That will likely be the classical economist's take; I'm not an economist, so take my responses that much less seriously.

But there's also the story of a seedling crop of economies from Lesotho to Bangladesh getting unnecessarily paved over in the name of market efficiency without a full accounting of the social costs involved. And there's also the ongoing, relatively well known story of a country like China just tweaking its repressive model into a repressive model plus well-connected robber barons -- and reaping economic, "market driven" rewards for its perspicacious economic policies, and its highly ironic symbioses with companies like Wal-Mart.

None of us can do much about the long-planned demise of MFA/ACT. We should recognize, though, that the resulting even lower, lower prices come at a cost to someone else. I think we should do our best to support companies (like Gap and Nike) that are apparently bucking the low-price-at-all-costs tide. We should do our best to support countries like Cambodia and (as far as I can tell) Mauritius that aren't racing to the bottom by failing to enact or failing to enforce labor laws protecting children, the right to organize, overtime, and decent time off, to name a few. And we should not let overseas wage pressures keep us from insisting on all of that for our own workforce as well.

We'll need some help with that, though. From "Workers' Rights at Risk":

The World Trade Organization won't step into the thorny battle over global labor standards, arguing that the issue is outside its area of trade liberalization. And critics say the Bush administration's trade team has worked hard to open markets for U.S. firms but hasn't done enough to protect workers from exploitation and to keep the air and water clean.

... by failing to include tough penalties in the trade agreements it pursues. Both the WTO and the United States government must be forced to re-evaluate what it is they're trying to accomplish: the lowest priced tube socks possible, or the most people living decently possible. At a minimum, the World Trade Organization or an organization of similar scope must hammer out agreements about the global standards for workers' rights that must be met year in and year out to avoid being cut out of the global economic game. And at a minimum, the United States should pursue bilateral trade agreements that aim at the same thing. That's a foreign policy for the 21st century that could pay dividends for red states and blue states alike.


=====
* UPDATE, 1/18: It's probably not surprising that opinions differ strongly about The Gap. The labor group UNITE published a very critical November, 2002 assessment of the company, titled The Gap's Global Sweatshop, that discusses the company's role in some of the same countries (e.g., Lesotho) that the LA Times series does. (Via General Glut's Globblog.) A group called Sweatshopwatch recommends small companies like "No Sweat" and "Global Exchange Fair Trade Store" over The Gap. posted by Thomas Nephew at 1:15:00 AM -- |