The most recent 20 comments posted to Making Light by Zander:

"present-day fears about technology overpowering its masters and the hubris of the inventor."

Um, I keep coming across this--it's the standard view of "Frankenstein"'s message, rehashed in all the film versions, and for all I know Mary S herself thought that was what she was doing.

It doesn't say anything like that to me. It says: if you are going to do something, take responsibility for it. Do not go Ooh Ick and run away, do not blame your creation for your bad workmanship, do not pretend that it wasn't you, and damn well carry it through to the end. None of the troubles that Frankenstein suffers stem from the fact that he created a man; all of them stem from the fact that he then abandoned it because it wasn't as pretty as he wanted it to be.

Is this me being weird, or is it something I see that other people, better and wiser people than I, for some reason don't?

Lovelace and Babbage is a beautiful thing and deserves to be more widely known.

And Gallifrey. Let's not forget that nuWho happened while they were planning this thing.

Laertes #41: so if the economy continues to tumble into complete chaos, people continue to get ill and die and not go to doctors because they can't afford it, the war goes on indefinitely--you'll count his administration a success if he just locks up the last guy and his friends?

Well, gee, I'm sure we can find one worthwhile thing Bush did in his time (wasn't there something about aid to Africa?), so maybe his presidency was a success as well. Or maybe a president has to keep all the plates spinning at once, and some are more immediate (let's not say important) than others.

Something that's occurred to me: there are still troops over in Iraq fighting this war, aren't there? Maybe Obama thinks it would be better to wait till he's managed to end the war before he prosecutes people for starting it. I don't know. Just a thought.

Jimcat #25: I know, and I'm glad I was wrong, but the fear remains. I don't know if anyone on the left was actually talking about e.g. seceding from the Union if Bush got in in 2000. I'm just not sure that the left and the right are equivalent in this area. I'd love to be wrong again, though. I really would.

David #33: the rule of law has always been, to a greater or lesser extent, at the pleasure of the wealthy and powerful. Kipling's "old king" never went away, because it wasn't him they got rid of, just some guy in a funny hat. Sad but true.

I think there's a point being missed here.

I too long to see Bush and Cheney and everyone who did or authorised the doing of these things arrested, tried, convicted, and locked up. But I also remember that before the election I was terrified that with the power these people had (and still have in large measure, let's not forget that) they would upturn the entire country rather than allow Obama to take office.

They have supporters, and some of those supporters are not susceptible to reason, and they have guns and money. I don't for one moment believe Obama is concerned for his own personal safety, or he would never have put himself up there, but I believe he is concerned for domestic order and the safety of his citizens. I think prosecuting Bush and his administration, while it would make us all cheer for truth and justice and what they used to call the American Way, would be a disastrous move in practical terms, and that that is why he isn't doing it.

We're strong enough to see our foes brought to justice and be told that we were right all along. Hooray for us. Are we strong enough to survive the assault on law and order that might result therefrom?

So justice and law are subordinate to wealth and power. That's how it is, how it always has been (read Juvenal, or Swift) and in order to make any difference at all to that, Obama needs to be in charge of a country at peace for a bit longer than a few months. If that means letting the architects of evil go free for now, well, I don't like it, but I can deal with it.

(Of course, I'm several thousand miles away, which helps...but what happens in America affects the world, as we've seen, and the trouble caused by the economic collapse would be nothing to the fallout from a general collapse of government in your country. And I think that would be a real possibility if Obama antagonises the right too much.)

The buck is with him. Can we sort of trust him for a little longer maybe?

I love both Stephen Fry and Hugh Laurie, but I found the series less than satisfying for many reasons. That sketch typifies one of them: I think it was less funny than it could have been because they were making fun of too many things at once. Fry's artificially precious manner got in the way of the verbal humour and vice versa, and the only real laugh I got from it was when Laurie undercut all the posturing with that brilliantly economical look at the camera and then away. He is the better actor of the two, as Fry is (I think) the better writer.

But thank you for showing it to me again and enabling me to recover these thoughts from oblivion.

Wyman #7: exactly right. The default setting for humans' BS detectors is off, and it's important that this should be allowed to remain so; otherwise no meaningful interaction would be possible. I think it's all very clever, but not a good thing to do.

It's amazing how easy it is to assume that all the people who are upset, or all the people who for whatever reason didn't follow guidelines, or all the people whose queries amused the agents, are by that token bad writers.

I don't see any correlation between writing ability and thickness of skin.

I've given up using Directory Enquiries from anyone as a result of this. I can't keep track of the numbers or the prices, and we have a phone book anyway. So no-one's getting money from me for that service, which I have to assume is okay with them...

Nicole @130: thank you. :)

Would the literal Latin rendering of "ausmachen/uitmaken" as "ex+facio"="efficio, effeci, effectum" (as in effect, efficiency, effectuate, and also efface) be relevant here?

As another Bush so movingly sang:

"I take my shoes off
And throw them at the Prez
And I'll be
Two steps in America..."

Lynn #1: ah, that would explain the piece from a Herald journalist bemoaning the good old days of the sixties when people could talk about politics without getting nasty, and ending with an incredibly offensive "can we all please grow up now?" that made me snarl at the friend who quoted it, and who didn't deserve that.

Bad enough that a journalist was trying to occupy the moral high ground...

Stefan #171: "...she's on."*

Thank you, America. If you can get through to the inauguration without anything untoward happening, I might just begin to believe it.

And in congratulating McCain on his "class and honor" during the campaign, Obama showed that you now have a president-elect who fully understands sarcasm. Which can only be a good thing.

*Really obscure film reference.

Well, that's not the only way he could be taken out of the picture, but okay.

Since they didn't redo the election in 2000, though, when the wrong guy actually got into the White House (and Al Gore wasn't John Kerry either), I can't help wondering what it would take to make that happen.

I'm just scared. America's really big, and the thought of it not being in safe hands for another four years is quite terrifying.

Unlike Graydon, I don't think the US is utterly corrupt, not even in the data processing sense. (At least, I hope not...it's a fair bet no-one's bothered to take a backup.)

I do believe that your electoral system may now be irretrievably broken, though again I hope not.

And just for giggles, here's my nightmare scenario:

Nov 4: Election Day. Tensions run high due to various incidents of attempted voter suppression.
As the ballots are counted, three major population centres erupt in violence as a number of individuals, identified as Republican party operatives, are caught apparently attempting to compromise the voting machines. Agents provocateurs whip up Obama supporters into a fury, and carefully orchestrated riots break out across the country.

Nov 5: Violence intensifies. National Guard units are federalised to maintain order. Military units recalled earlier in the year are put on standby. Obama, shamed by the activities of his supporters, is forced to announce his withdrawal from the election on grounds of conscience, leaving John McCain unopposed.

Nov 6: President-elect McCain assassinated while making a public appearance to plead for calm. President Bush declares a state of emergency and imposes martial law.

January 20: Sarah Palin sworn in as President.

January 21: World goes to hell in a handbasket.

There are probably all sorts of detailed reasons why it could not happen precisely this way. I don't need to know those. I just need one good convincing reason why nothing even remotely like this could ever happen in America. Because I don't think there is one.

Um, I wouldn't put too much stress on "Barack" being the equivalent of "Benedict." I'm sure that somewhere in the vast corpus of occult lore there is a treatise on numerology by whose system "Obama" can be made to equate to "Arnold"...

Matt #10: we* know how to feel like we're winning something. And we know when. It's when we've actually won something.

"...because of what, Bonnie?"

"Tempting fate."

The better our odds get, the less chance the Republicans have of winning an honest or even a fixed election, the more necessary it is to consider that they might try something else, something much worse than Diebold hacking. There may be a monster at the end of the book right up to the moment when we turn that last page, and we do not rule out that possibility.

"...because of what, Bonnie?"

"Tempting fate."

We haven't won till we've won. When the election is conclusively called for Obama and the casualty count (if any--see, I can be hopeful) stops rising, then we've won. Till then, the chickens stay uncounted, the champagne or equivalent stays in the bottle and the day of jubilee is on hold.

"...because of what, Bonnie?"

"Tempting fate."

*Okay, I'm a Brit, but if I weren't I'd be voting Obama. He's not perfect, but America and the world we share with it needs to be protected from what the Republican party has willingly turned itself into.

Okay, I lost it at Powerline's "the pro-status quo, anti-change candidate, Barack Obama."

There comes a point where it becomes physically painful to look at, this wilful abnegation of manifest reality, this apparent belief that saying the opposite of the obvious truth will somehow make it true. These are the agents of darkness, of chaos and old night, and their leader is the Father of Lies.

Comment statistics for Zander on the Making Light blog

Total: 52 comments. View all these comments on a single page.