Transcending Tom & Jerry

In the previous few entries I've written about how so much antagonism in the world is actually pushed by an aggressive minority. The tolerant, peace-loving mainstream of any society has more in common with its counterpart in supposedly antagonistic societies than with the hawkish element of its own society. The problem is that the element which responds to provocation with canine energy rather than human wisdom tends, by virtue of its very snarling aggression, to be the element that's clawed itself into authority.

One option is for the pacifists to match the intensity by turning militant. Elements of the anti-war struggle in the 1960's demonstrated the moral subversion and horrific results of this paradoxical approach (the Right falls into the same rabbit hole, e.g. when militant reverence for human life leads to the murder of abortionists). As Christ, Ghandi, and King spectacularly proved, the most moral strategy is also the most efficacious: step back from the Tom & Jerry cartoon and behave in a high-minded, disciplined manner and unilaterally decline to escalate injustice into a cycle of self-defeating aggression (as any four year old knows, two wrongs don't make a right, but adults are cloudier).

The problem is that the strategy of provocation is now everywhere, and governments, which barely even recognize its contours, are ill-suited to maintaining a rational, moral course through its distinctive emotional echo chambers. However virtuous individual leaders might be, governments themselves are amoral. Governments, after all, are the Toms and the Jerrys. We, the people, are neither Tom nor Jerry. During the cold war, Russian plumbers never posed the slightest threat to my auto parts store-owning American father, or vice versa! The Pakistani dentist who'd be killed in a war with India did not train Lashkar-e-Toiba.

International relations are like soccer matches, and, as in soccer, the vast majority of onlookers delude themselves by imagining greater kinship with the competitors on the playing field than with their fellow onlookers, regardless of affiliation. Once the delusion is dropped, the crowd in the bleachers easily recognizes their affinity. If reasonable Israelis and reasonable Palestinians, reasonable Democrats and reasonable Republicans, reasonable Pakistanis and reasonable Indians, all of whom are brothers and sisters by virtue of the unity of their peaceful aspirations and the tenor of their temperaments, are ever to conspire to break the demented cycle of provocation, it will be via direct and personal contact rather than via the proxy of their respective authorities.

It's tempting to imagine that Obama might be cool-headed and high-minded enough to resist being manipulated by provocation (though his bellicose - and fatuous - vow to drive through Pakistan's tribal frontier gives pause). But when America is provoked into a vengeful tizzy, it will be politically impossible for any president to take a higher road. For one thing, the Christian right would never cotton to a truly Christian approach.

Read, if you'd like, this follow-up article.

Give Carnage a Chance

According to this report:

"The Indian government is considering suspending a peace process with Pakistan following the attacks on Mumbai blamed on Pakistan-based militants, the Press Trust of India, or PTI, reported Sunday. There is a view in the government that India should suspend the peace process... to show that it is not going to take lightly the deadly carnage in Mumbai,"

The making of peace - the cessation of violence - does indeed require taking deadly carnage lightly. Personally, I have precious little interest in deadly carnage. But in times like these, we tend to trot out our deadly carnage aficionados, don't we? The german shephard-like individuals who believe that the answer to violence is not peace but a ratcheting up of violence all around, even if it means flailing a bit?

Will we human beings ever learn to react to extremism with enlightened moderation rather than with reciprocal extremism? Perhaps one day, like tree branches growing to create a canopy over a road, the good, tolerant majority of each antagonistic group will reach out to their counterparts, with whom they have more in common than with their more seething compatriots. 

When I was a kid during the cold war, I didn't fear ordinary Russians in the least. I'd have been pen pals with any of them if I could. I feared their rulers and their arsenal. Similarly, there are many Jewish/Palestinian and Pakistani/Indian friendships, and the potential for vastly more. The problem is that we, the peaceful majority, are always hostage to our societies' most aggressive element (and our pandering, posturing governments). Aggression drives everything, even evolution. In a pasture full of blissfully moo-ing cows and a few angry bulls, who's going to run the show?

One problem, of course, is that it's not all black and white. Kind-hearted, reasonable people can unknowingly act german shephard-ish. We all, in fact, possess an inner german shephard. A reader (who I know to have a good heart) left this comment regarding a Slog entry calling for political reconciliation:

"After eight years of hearing leftists called traitor and un-American who should be hung or deported, I'm really not in the mood for bipartisan cooperation."

One must suspend reconciliation if one doesn't take partisanship lightly! Obviously self-contradictory as it is, this is how we humans are wired. And the key is to be as aware of this as possible. Our instinctive response to provocation cannot be eliminated, only repressed and/or transcended (sort of like the impulse to club over the head and drag off to our apartments attractive strangers we pass in shopping malls). There are myriad such instincts we, the civilized, recognize in ourselves and refuse, with varying success, to act upon. This particular one is a biggie, and it's to blame for the vast majority of current suffering in the world, yet it remains almost completely subconscious for most people, even though a very smart guy, whom billions profess to revere, explained about it quite clearly 2000 years ago.

The Myth of Reconciliation?

I can't seem to escape the chill that fell over me earlier today. Approaching a red light, I noticed that the car stopped in front of me had an "Obama" bumper sticker. But as I drifted closer, I spotted a red slash through the name. Not a big, goofy, cartoon-like slash. Rather, a thin, surgical hash; neat, understated, and scarlet red. No other writing of any sort.

I'd seen some pretty over-the-top bumper stickers and t-shirts about President Bush. But, searching my mind, I couldn't recall anything equally sinister. And, unlike Bush, Obama's not actually done anything yet, and so can't be disagreed with on issues of policy; only on the issue of existence. The driver in front of me had chosen to announce to the world his opposition on that one.

This happened not in Arkansas but in Danbury, Connecticut. And it made me recall an article (I can't remember where it appeared) observing that Democrats are under the bizarre delusion that the entire country feels a sense of reconciliation via the election of Obama. I suppose he was correct; I find it hard to imagine anyone feeling seriously negative toward someone as obviously intelligent, centrist, and level-headed as Obama, at least not at this point. Indeed, I've heard steely Republicans such as Ed Rollins making more than cursory vows to support the president in the unprecedented trials ahead. I thought we were enjoying a brief post-partisan lull.

But today it was driven deeply home for me that there are people, maybe even loads of people, who, for whatever reason (racism, tribalism, campaign demagoguery or Rush Limbaugh) are feeling very very unreconciliatory.

(As for centrism - and Obama's appointments seem as centrist as can be - I recall that nothing infuriated Republicans more than when Bill Clinton adopted and advanced their agendas. They just hated that. Which illustrates that our nation's divide is, again, tribal.)

A Historic Turning Point re: Terrorism

The chief of the Pakistani intelligence service, ISI, will be traveling to India (a first for a ISI director) to assist with the investigation of the recent attacks. This is very, very good news.

At least one goal of these attacks is clear: to provoke India into confrontation with Pakistan. This would slog up the latter government's counter-terrorism push into its tribal regions, apply yet more destabilizing pressure on that shaky government (which fundamentalists would love to see fall), and generally provoke the sort of anti-Muslim counteractions that create more jihadists (this sort of provocation is the prime goal, though most of our leaders seem not to have gotten the memo).

But not this time. "The Indian prime minister stressed the need of intelligence sharing and evolving a joint strategy to counter terrorism." In other words, rivals will be working together to root out the bad guys rather than escalating their rivalries. That's not how it was supposed to work.

For a pragmatic and surprising look at dynamics in the Middle East, including a hopeful perspective on Iran, please watch this great video from CSPAN of a talk by Robert Baer, a retired CIA veteran who just published "The Devil We Know: Dealing with the New Iranian Superpower". Really, trust me...don't miss it! Baer believes the jihadist movement is in decline because the tide of Moslem opinion has turned against those guys. For one thing, results have been very poor for Moslems. Baer notes that Moslem mothers have been turning their jihadist sons in to the police in Britain. With the glory gone, and enemies joining together in response to terrorism rather than lashing out at each other, terrorism really does look like a losing proposition.

Which will not, of course, put a firm end to it. Basque terrorists in Spain continue to ply their violent craft to the shame and horror of most Basques - who are mostly opposed or ambivalent to independence. And we'll always have our Ted Bundys and Manson Families, and their technological tool chest will continue to expand. But a few parties truly meriting the term "extremists", operating far out of step with the mainstream of their societies, is a vastly preferable scenario to massively expanded jihadist attacks on civilians.

Black Friday Deals

I'm a big fan of Canon's "Pixma" line of multipurpose printers (they print, copy, and scan), and there's a great Black Friday price of just $89 on the very highly-rated Canon Pixma MP610.

Amazon's price of $199.99 on the first generation iPod Touch 16 GB is way low.

...and now I'm now out the door to shop for massively discounted cashmere blazers and other Black Friday deals at Jos. A. Bank

Hell Circle Du Jour: Cancelling Wireless Accounts

I've had occasion to cancel accounts with just about every major wireless provider. And the task has always brought a bag of hurt (a phrase which, by the way, just went over one million Google hits).

One doesn't simply cancel a wireless account. You must call a special phone number and speak to specialist personnel chosen for their psychopathic inability to register expressions of rejection. You will be asked to explain and defend your foolish decision. You will be offered things. You will be cajoled and niggled. After many minutes of spiel, deal, and distraction, your request will eventually be granted, but only after you've uttered the word "no" more times than JD Salinger's publicist.

Three cancellations ago, I tried to strategize the process. I told the representative "Look, I understand that it's your job to try a variety of angles to persuade me not to cancel. I know this, I understand this. You're just doing your job. But I want to assure you that by the time we hang up, my account will definitely be dead and gone. So...can we, like, move through the script as quickly as possible so neither of us needs to waste time?"

Fat chance. The rep settled in to his amiable patter ('So how are you doing today, sir?"), and I realized stronger measures than this are required to stave off The Full Treatment. He probed, questioned, bantered, and pushed with all his might. In the end, of course, my account was cancelled, but not before the company had extracted its pound of psychic flesh.

The next time I had to cancel a wireless account, and was asked my reason, I informed the rep that I was headed to prison. The unstoppable rep actually asked me what I was going in for. "Arson" I shot back, matter-of-factly. In the ensuing silence, I began to gleefully suspect I'd nailed it and found a shortcut through the torture. I fully expected to hear the magic words "Sir, I've cancelled your account; if you ever desire to reestablish service with our company, please don't hesitate to contact us". But I was wrong. After the awkward silence, the rep cleared his throat and offered me one thousand free minutes if I'd obligate myself for another year. And so on.

During my most recent cancellation, I told them I was dying of Lou Gehrig's Disease, and was too weak to hold a handset. That, in fact, I was draining my last remaining strength to make this phone call as part of my effort to put my affairs in order. They rushed things a tad for me, but only a tad. Scant mercy for a dying man. (When the deed was finally done, I informed the rep - who after all, I didn't mean to leave traumatized - that "today I feel like the luckiest man in the world.")

I'm currently with T-Mobile, and my locked-in contract period just ended. And it just occurred to me (I may be slow, but I'm not dumb) that I'd be a fool not to call, ask to cancel, and hear what they have to offer. Maybe I'll tell them I have my eye on a nice shiny iPhone over at AT&T. Let's see what juicy bribes and counter-offers I'm showered with.

I'll let you know how it goes. Though, with my luck, this time they'll immediately cancel me without protest, and I'll be completely screwed.

Bic Crystal Ballpoint Pen, Medium Point, Black

I wrote this prank review (inspired by this earlier review for the same product) several years ago, but I'm not sure anyone noticed.

Be sure and read the comments posted to the earlier one.

How to Enter Sensitive Passwords on Public Computers

Update: this tip is no longer as secure as it once was. It's now quite easy to install, along with the sneaky software that captures and logs keystrokes, software that captures and logs the content of clipboards.

That said, to evade run-of-the-mill maliciousness, this "bathroom door lock" solution is still reasonably effective. If 100 people use a (compromised) public computer in a week, your data will be by far the biggest headache to extract, and trolling for passwords is a "low fruit" sort of enterprise.

But in any situation where you feel you may be personally singled out (e.g. someone's after you, or you're the sole American customer in a 3rd world cybercafe run by dodgy characters), this may not be your best move.

---

Prudent people hesitate to enter sensitive data on shared computers (e.g. in Internet cafes). Such computers may have been maliciously set up with keystroke capturing programs that track each letter typed on the keyboard. The problem is, how do you log onto critical online banking, or personal email, when the only option is an untrustworthy public computer?

Here's a low-tech trick. Don't type paswords. Cut and paste them, character-by-character! Open a new browser window or tab, and go to any page dense with text (Google News works well). Then individually copy the characters of your password and paste them in to the appropriate field. You can save some hassle at little additional security risk by directly typing a few characters. 

Yes, it would be theoretically possible for a hacker to create a program that captures the screen location of each click, precise window location, plus a cached version of the fast-changing Google News page to know what was being clicked, but that would require vast technical accumen, massive storage and horrendous data-sifting headaches entirely unsuited to a low-fruit ploy like stealing passwords from public computers.

This does the trick when you're on the road and need to grab your mail in some scummy Kinko's!

Exciting Times for Smartphones and Cameras

There's never been a better time not to buy a smartphone. 

With its iPhone, Apple has again innovated an entirely new standard of quality and design...and, for the first time, drawn credible competition. The new Razr and the new Blackberry may not be perfect, but they offer a fancy touchscreen, slick interface, look real good, and have started to push forward with features notoriously missing from the iPhone (e.g. video, cut and paste, zoom, flash, removable battery). There's every indication that Apple will compete aggressively to defend their position...something they've never particularly had to do. And that can only mean a much better product at a much better price. To buy a smartphone now would be crazy; we'll be seeing amazing things in the next year (if we're not all too poor and unemployed to buy such things).

Same for cameras; Micro Four Thirds technology, recently introduced with Panasonic’s DMC-G1 camera (see David Pogue's review), allows S.L.R. quality and flexibility without the bulk and full expense of a reflex lens. The Panasonic is still pretty large, pretty expensive, and lacks some important features, but other manufacturers are busily working on the technology and in the next year we'll see some amazing products.

So...take good care of your smartphone and your camera. This is no time to replace them!

Suckered

It turns out I was suckered on that "George Bush Gets Snubbed by World Leaders" story, which I wrote about yesterday. Just before the video in that report, Bush had warmly greeted everyone present...and so did not need to do so again.

I thought I could trust a report from CNN. Rick Sanchez should be ashamed of himself. Not only is this wretchedly poor reporting, but it fuels the right's indignation about liberal media, about CNN simply being the left wing analogue of Fox News, etc, etc. And that line isn't mere bluster...the constant pressure placed upon "liberal media" is responsible for the sort of overcompensation that caused a lot of American mass media to stifle their doubts re: the Iraq War.