Почитав постинги и комментарии некоторых лжеюзеров по поводу известных политических событий, я подозреваю, что скоро начнутся перебои с фольгой, ЕВПОЧЯ. Ссылок приводить не буду, ибо "если ты долго смотришь в бездну, то ..."
ZOMG, structural feminists! OH NOES! ГОЛАКТЕГО ОПАСНОСТЕ! (It's "structuralist", by the way.) So far the only anti-science sentiment we've heard was from Sarah "Lowry's Little Starbursts" Palin, who seems to have nothing but disdain for basic research. Fruit flies, pshaw. Never mind that many modern breakthroughs in genetics came from studying ... wait for it ... fruit flies. Obama, on the contrary, has so far shown himself to be a hard empiricist. This is evident, for example, from the list of economists he has surrounded himself with, including Larry Summers, the man whom any structuralist feminist would view as Teh Satan for certain remarks he had made that cost him the presidency at Harvard. So no, I'm not worried that structuralist feminists are taking over the Obama administration.
1. It's "structural" according to Obama. ""To avoid being mistaken for a sellout, I chose my friends carefully," the Democratic presidential candidate wrote in his memoir, "Dreams From My Father." "The more politically active black students. The foreign students. The Chicanos. The Marxist professors and structural feminists."
2. Obama has not shown himself to be much of anything yet, since he hasn't been in a leadership position. Conversely, I don't remember hearing about Palin stripping funding from Alaskan researchers.
1. I stand corrected. I haven't read Dreams From My Father. Either "structural" or "structuralist" seems to be fine (2,330 vs. 3,340 Google hits, respectively).
2. I've read Obama's policy papers and I've read guys like Cass Sunstein and Larry Summers, who have his ear. So far, what I have seen is that Obama surrounds himself with competent and pragmatic experts. Being a techie nerd, that's something I respect and admire. People like Daniel Larison (http://www.amconmag.com/larison/2008/11/06/rahm-emanuel/) or John Cole (http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=13549) don't seem to doubt that Obama will govern from the center. You may go ahead and look for signs of Impending Socialist Doom (tm); I just hope that you don't end up sounding like these dudes (http://arbat.livejournal.com/313487.html?thread=11332751#t11332751).
As for Palin -- no, she didn't strip funding from Alaskan researchers (can she even do that?). But I take the long view. What I see is contempt for disinterested expertise, carefully disguised as "anti-elitism". What I see is her appointing a high school classmate to the top of Alaska's Division of Agriculture, her only qualification being her professed "love of cows". What I also see is McCain's sneering remarks about studying "grizzly bear DNA". All of this points to one thing, once again: disdain for disinterested expertise.
I have become leary of disinterested expertise because on most issues with any social traction and big budgets at stake, most of the experts have an agenda. From the Great Society to the food shortages and ice age that were being forecast in the 1970's, to global warming (er, I mean, climate change,) to the sub-prime mortgage crisis, we've seen time and time again that people with very prestigious academic pedigrees and positions make the wrong prediction with absolute aplomb. This is not unique to academia, by the way-national intelligence has done the same thing repeatedly, for instance, with Saddam's WMD's. Obama has surrounded himself with people like the former leadership of Freddy and Fanny. Why should this impress me?
Do I think that Obama is going to declare a socialist dictatorship like some of the people you quoted? No, but I think that he will push legislation that's going to be very bad for the economy and for private liberty, in classic soft socialist style. He might lose the war in Iraq (I'm not sure that it's losable by anything America does at this point, but if it is, he'll do it,) and will probably fuck up Afghanistan as well, based on his failure to understand counterinsurgency strategy thus far. I hope not. Anyway, if any of this makes me eligible for the tinfoil hat brigade, that's cool. But I remember people caterwauling "fuck middle America!" and "I'm moving to France!" after the last election.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Re: how 'bout this:
Re: how 'bout this:
2. Obama has not shown himself to be much of anything yet, since he hasn't been in a leadership position. Conversely, I don't remember hearing about Palin stripping funding from Alaskan researchers.
Re: how 'bout this:
2. I've read Obama's policy papers and I've read guys like Cass Sunstein and Larry Summers, who have his ear. So far, what I have seen is that Obama surrounds himself with competent and pragmatic experts. Being a techie nerd, that's something I respect and admire. People like Daniel Larison (http://www.amconmag.com/larison/2008/11/06/rahm-emanuel/) or John Cole (http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=13549) don't seem to doubt that Obama will govern from the center. You may go ahead and look for signs of Impending Socialist Doom (tm); I just hope that you don't end up sounding like these dudes (http://arbat.livejournal.com/313487.html?thread=11332751#t11332751).
As for Palin -- no, she didn't strip funding from Alaskan researchers (can she even do that?). But I take the long view. What I see is contempt for disinterested expertise, carefully disguised as "anti-elitism". What I see is her appointing a high school classmate to the top of Alaska's Division of Agriculture, her only qualification being her professed "love of cows". What I also see is McCain's sneering remarks about studying "grizzly bear DNA". All of this points to one thing, once again: disdain for disinterested expertise.
Re: how 'bout this:
Do I think that Obama is going to declare a socialist dictatorship like some of the people you quoted? No, but I think that he will push legislation that's going to be very bad for the economy and for private liberty, in classic soft socialist style. He might lose the war in Iraq (I'm not sure that it's losable by anything America does at this point, but if it is, he'll do it,) and will probably fuck up Afghanistan as well, based on his failure to understand counterinsurgency strategy thus far. I hope not. Anyway, if any of this makes me eligible for the tinfoil hat brigade, that's cool. But I remember people caterwauling "fuck middle America!" and "I'm moving to France!" after the last election.