The Political Significance of this Cannot be Understated

but it has entertainment value, so…

Thanks to Mary for passing this one on

My ISP has jumped to Word Press.  I don’t like it, but unless I want to do a lot of code work, I am now stuck with the look of Word Press.  I am not sure the old look was the Good, but I was used to it.  Not sure if Word Press is Bad or Ugly, you can help me decide.  Don’t like that changey thing, I guess.

This may be what the black bloc needs:  Ukes!  and Accordions.

Scanning the News

A few items jumped out at me.

  •  WAPO says Obama is looking ahead to the 2014 congressional election because the current GOP house is hopeless. Our situation on the shore of the Salish Sea is the same, but it’s the Repub senate in WA State that is the big problem on the local level.  It worth noting that the US popular vote for House of Reps went solidly to the dems in 2012 despite a lot of vote suppression work, but thanks to successful district gerrymandering by the Republican Party.  I am not sanguine about the legislative results that derive from the Democratic Congress that Barack might dream about.  I am thinking we need to elect the climate congress at State and Federal level in 2014.  That would be a group who would actually act on global warming.  The dems talk the talk.  The Repubs talk denial by and large.  We need elected bodies who will walk the walk.  That would be a peaceful revolution to elect Climate Congress in 2014.  I am down with that.
  • Alternet reports that some important assumptions that underly the “science” of economics and human nature are probably wrong.  The study is controversial in several regards, but the results seem to indicate that economists and psychologists have viewed the world through the lens provided by studying human nature as it exists in industrialized communities and making an assumption about how the dominant paradigm of industrialized communities is human nature.  Oops.

  • More human nature stuff from Alternet and Globalpossibilities.org:
    Could feelings of disgust be the key to saving the planet from global warming? Strange as it might seem, the answer may be yes.

    Concern over environmental harm is disproportionately a liberal phenomena, but concern over violating the purity and sanctity of nature cuts across ideological lines. What’s more, it’s not an abstract concern. Violations of morality of the purity/sanctity kind are linked to a visceral disgust.

    This isn’t just idle speculation. A new series of studies suggests a potential way out of the polarized gridlock that’s crippled our national response to the threat of global warming. ” The Moral Roots of Environmental Attitudes,” by Matthew Feinberg and Robb Willer, published in Psychological Science in December, studied the impact of framing environmental communication in terms of different moral frameworks, and concluded that messaging based on the moral value of purity, which appeals primarily to conservatives, can help bridge the ideological divide on environmental issues—including global warming.

Spike Lee is correct:  Do the right thing.

Paul Cienfuegos on Community Rights Ordinances

Five minutes and 20 seconds.  Grab a cup of coffee and give Paul a listen.

Paul and I agree on a lot of things, but we both start from the point that single issue activism is not going to get the work done.

Paul is a TESC (The Evergreen State College) alum, here is Paul’s website. He has done trainings in Olympia and Shelton on community rights and helped Salish Sea activists shut down the biomass projects a couple of years ago.