Liu, THE ROAD TO HYPERINFLATION, Part 3

THE ROAD TO HYPERINFLATION, Part 3
Inflation targeting
By Henry C K Liu

(See also PART 1: Fed helpless in its own crisis)
PART 2: A failure of central banking)

Photos: Ha Ji Won

하지원 밀라노서 패셔니스타 위용 빛났다





하지원, 이태리 명품 '모스키노 칩 앤 시크 2008 A/W '서 관심 집중!



하지원 명품 미모, 이태리에서도 인정받아


하지원, 이태리서 동양미 뽐내다!


하지원, 이태리에서도 빛난 외모


패션스타 하지원, 이태리를 매료시켰다

So I have been subbing for this third-grade class long enough to witness one friendship between two girls come apart... I don't know what happened, but it seems to have started last week, when E came up to me and told me that C didn't want to be her friend anymore, and that whenever C hung around A she would ignore E. Before the three had been constantly together, recess, rehearsal, and in class too, if possible. Today E tattled on C and her friend M (apparently C is not friends with A any more), telling me that they were doing something other than work. I didn't really have time to sort through the mess--if I did, I'd talk to E about tattling and how it's not good to hold a grudge or seek to get revenge by getting other people in trouble. But she's continued being crazy this week, and I had other students to deal with...

Besides what can a teacher (much less a sub) really do except referee and make sure no one gets physically hurt? I suppose one could see if there is a problem at the root of this, but perhaps they just no longer like one another... (for one reason or another)

Today one of the other students asked me for whom I would be voting, Clinton or Obama, and I said neither, and that puzzled her. Her. I also told her that a president didn't have to be good in order to be voted for a second term and that stumped her as well...

Zenit: Pope's Q-and-A Session With Roman Clergy, Part 9

Pope's Q-and-A Session With Roman Clergy, Part 9
On the Christian Identity [2008-02-20]

Get Karl Oh Soo Jung MV

Hayley Westenra/岡本知高 -Ave Maria

Hayley Westenra-Amazing Grace

Photos: Hayley Westenra

She seems like she lost some weight in the last video, but maybe it's a bad capture. I hope she doesn't feel the pressure to be thin. From her Treasure 2007 photoshoot:


Yeah, I picked those two because of the clothes' Chinese influence.






Hayley Westenra & Dave Dobbyn - Hine e Hine (Live)

Hayley Westenra & Dave Dobbyn - Down To the River (Live)

Hayley Westenra -- Down to the River to Pray


Hayley Westenra - God Defend New Zealand


Hayley Westenra - I Hope I Never


That Kiwi accent.... ;)

I don't see any tour dates in the U.S. for this year...

Pokarekare Ana / Russell Watson & Hayley Westenra

Video : Fraternité St. Vincent-Ferrier

@ NLM

official site

Looks like the Community of St. John in Princeville is building a conference center/guest house.

Edit: According to Fr. E in the comments:

The Community of Saint John was founded by a Dominican (who remained a Dominican to his death). Their rule is a hybrid between the Rules of Saint Augustine and Saint Benedict. Their intellectual formation is based on St. Thomas Aquinas.

And there's this from Fr. Augustine Thompson, O.P.:

My thanks to those who have above extended good wishes on my creation as S.T.M. If any readers plan to be in the Bay Area on November 15, 2008, they may consider themselves invited to the investiture with ring and biretta, which will be at 10:30 a.m. that day (a Saturday) at St. Albert the Great Priory in Oakland CA. Readers will probably be interested to know that the ceremony has not changed since 1690. I will try to put up a posting on it when the time comes.

KunstlerCast: Drugstores

@ Global Public Media: KunstlerCast: Drugstores (mp3)

The Trilogy of Renzo di Lorenzo

What to make of this? Website of a reader of Fr. Z's blog.

Zenit: Pope's Q-and-A Session With Roman Clergy, Parts 7 and 8

Pope's Q-and-A Session With Roman Clergy, Part 8

On Large Celebrations of the Mass [2008-02-19]

Pope's Q-and-A Session With Roman Clergy, Part 7
On Sharing the Gift of the Gospel [2008-02-18]

President's Day

Is today just another day off for federal employees and those fortunate to have an employer observing this holiday?

A day to honor Lincoln... at this point of my education it doesn't seem to me to be proper. What do I think of George Washington? First president of the United States under the Constitution, general, Virginian? In the past I had been a bit hostile to the American Revolution, accepting a critique of the American Revolution advanced by certain people who saw it as being tied to the Enlightenment. (Or worse, an example of unjustified disobedience and rebellion.) Others accepted this link with Enlightenment ideals but tried to make this a positive. Only recently have I started to reconsider it as a continuation of traditional English ideals about limited government and political liberty/rights, going back to the Magna Carta and being prominent during the 17th century. Now some Catholic political theorists may reject talk about rights and liberty as being antithetical to traditional Catholic political thought and the Natural Law, but I find myself disagreeing with this position more and more. Which is not to say that all notions of political liberty and rights are correct. But it does not seem to me a problem for a given society to use law to limit the possibility of legislators making unjust laws. (Though one would probably wrong to think that all such laws are universally applicable to all communities.)

1. What is the nature of society? (Is the social compact theory universally false? Or is it applicable to alliances and more "substantial" associations between political communities, but not to a political community itself?)
2. What is political authority?
3. Are there limits to political authority? What is the function of government?
4. What can be done to protect the members of a community from the misuse of political authority and tyranny?

If I could be doing anything right now, I'd be reading more about the Constitution and traditional Southern conservatism or republicanism, although that might seem pointless as well, since it does not appear we will be returning to a proper understanding of the Constitution and states' rights any time soon.

However if we are going to bring about relocalization and sustainability, it seems that we must focus our efforts in changing our states, rather than looking to the Federal government for direction.

From Kevin Gutzmann, Myths of the 4th of July:

1. The 4^th of July is a non-partisan holiday dedicated to recalling the legacy of the American Revolution.

In the Founders’ day, the 4^th of July was a partisan holiday. It was celebrated in the 1790s and 1800s by Jeffersonian Republicans desirous of showing their devotion to Jeffersonian, rather than Hamiltonian, political philosophy. If you were a Federalist in the 1790s, you likely would celebrate Washington’s Birthday instead of the 4^th of July. If you believed in the inherent power of the Executive in formulating foreign policy, in the power of Congress to charter a bank despite the absence of express constitutional authorization to do so, and in the power of the federal government to punish people who criticized the president or Congress, you would not celebrate the 4^th. The 4^th was the holiday of the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions of 1798, those great states’-rights blasts at federal lawlessness. It was the anti-Hamilton, anti-Washington, anti-nationalist holiday.

Theodore Dalrymple, The Marriage of Reason and Nightmare

The Marriage of Reason and Nightmare

A look at J.G. Ballard, author of Empire of the Sun.

Ballardian: the World of J.G. Ballard
JG Ballard: 20th Century Chronicler
Scriptorium - J. G. Ballard
Ballard, JG | Authors | Guardian Unlimited Books
J.G. Ballard - BBC Profile


Youtube: J.G. Ballard 2001 interview (Imprint, Writer in Profile)
J.G. Ballard - South Bank Show (Part 1/3)
J.G. Ballard - South Bank Show (Part 2/3)
J.G. Ballard - South Bank Show (Part 3/3)

Handle Me With Care

via Twitch


A romantic comedy about a man with two left arms?

The actress is cute...




(Doesn't Thailand have priorities other than making the use of the internet and cell phones possible?)

official site

Footage from The Good, The Bad, and the Weird
The Good the Bad and the Weird (2008) Movie | Movie News, Reviews ...

Donald Vandergriff's website

here

via DNI blog

Zenit: B16--On Being Transfigured

On Being Transfigured

"To Enter Into Life It Is Necessary to Listen to Jesus"

VATICAN CITY, FEB. 17, 2008 (Zenit.org).- Here is a translation of the address Benedict XVI delivered today before reciting the midday Angelus with several thousand people gathered in St. Peter's Square.

* * *

Dear Brothers and Sisters,

Yesterday, the spiritual exercises concluded here in the apostolic palace. As happens every year this retreat saw the Pope and his co-workers in the Roman Curia united in prayer and meditation. I thank those who were near to us spiritually: May the Lord give them recompense for their generosity.

Today, the Second Sunday of Lent, continuing along the way of penitence, the liturgy, after having presented the Gospel of Jesus' temptations in the desert last Sunday, invites us to reflect on the extraordinary event of the transfiguration on the mountain. Considered together, both episodes anticipate the paschal mystery: Jesus' struggle with the tempter is the prelude to the great final duel of the passion, while the light of his transfigured body anticipates the glory of the resurrection.

On the one hand we see Jesus fully man: He even shares temptation with us. On the other hand, we contemplate the Son of God: He divinizes our humanity. In this way we can say that these two Sundays act as pillars upon which rest the whole edifice of Lent right up to Easter, and, indeed, the whole structure of Christian life, which essentially consists in the paschal dynamism -- from death to life.

Mountains -- like Tabor and Sinai -- are the place of nearness to God. In relation to daily existence, the mountain is the elevated space where the pure air of creation is breathed. It is the place of prayer, where one is in the presence of the Lord, as were Moses and Elijah, who appeared alongside the transfigured Jesus and spoke to him of the "exodus" that awaited him in Jerusalem, that is, his Passover.

The transfiguration is an event of prayer: Praying, Jesus is immersed in God, he is united intimately to him, he adheres with his human will to the Father's will of love, and in this way light invades him and the truth of his being appears visibly: He is God, light from light. Even his robes become white and luminous. This makes one think of baptism, of the white robes worn by the neophytes. Those who are reborn in baptism are clothed in light, anticipating heavenly existence, which the Book of Revelation represents with the symbol of white robes (cf. Revelation 7:9,13).

This is the crucial point: The Transfiguration is an anticipation of the Resurrection, but this presupposes death. Jesus manifests his glory to the apostles so that they have the strength to face the scandal of the cross and understand that it is necessary to pass through many tribulations to reach the kingdom of God. The voice of the Father, which resounds from on high, proclaims Jesus as his beloved Son, as in the baptism in the Jordan, adding: "Listen to him" (Matthew 17:5). To enter into life it is necessary to listen to Jesus, to follow him along the way of the cross, carrying, like him, the hope of the resurrection in our heart. "Spe salvi," saved in hope. Today we can say: "Transfigured in hope."

Turning now in prayer to Mary, we recognize in her the human creature interiorly transfigured by the grace of Christ, and we entrust ourselves to her guidance to continue in the journey of Lent with faith.

[After the Angelus, the Holy Father said the following in Italian:]

I am following with concern the persistent manifestations of tension in Lebanon. For almost three months the country has not been able to appoint a head of state. The efforts to calm the crisis and the support offered by numerous high-profile members of the international community, even if they have not yet achieved anything, demonstrate the intention to identify a president who will be a president for all Lebanese and in this way create a basis for overcoming the existing divisions. Unfortunately, reasons for worry are not lacking, above all because of the strange verbal violence and because of those who put their trust in force of arms and in the physical elimination of adversaries.

Together with the Maronite patriarch and all the Lebanese bishops, I ask you to join with my supplication of Our Lady of Lebanon, that she encourage the citizens of that dear nation, and the politicians in particular, to work without ceasing for reconciliation, for a truly sincere dialogue, for peaceful co-existence and for the good of a homeland deeply felt as common.

[Translation by Joseph G. Trabbic]

[The Holy Father said in English:]

I greet all the English-speaking visitors present at today's Angelus, especially the group of pilgrims from Saint Ansgar's Cathedral in Copenhagen. I pray that your visit to Rome may strengthen your faith and deepen your love for Jesus Christ, our Lord and Saviour. In this Sunday's Gospel, we hear how Jesus was transfigured in the presence of his three closest followers, Peter, James and John. They were granted a glimpse of Christ in glory, and they heard the voice of the Father urging them to listen to his beloved Son. As we continue our Lenten journey, we renew our resolve to listen attentively to the Son of God, and we draw comfort and hope from the revelation of his glory. Upon all of you here today, and upon your families and loved ones at home, I invoke God's abundant blessings.

© Copyright 2008 -- Libreria Editrice Vaticana

Zenit: Pope's Q-and-A Session With Roman Clergy, Part 6

Pope's Q-and-A Session With Roman Clergy, Part 6
On Finding Silence and Space [2008-02-17]

Paul Gottfried, The Revolution and the Right

The Revolution and the Right

Kevin Gutzman, The U.S. Constitution is Not Democratic!

The U.S. Constitution is Not Democratic! (and why that’s a good thing)
Kevin Gutzman

Edit: Well, it was a good article, one that helped my process of re-thinking the Constitution and the nature of the Federal Government. Unfortunately it appears to have disappeared from the website.

Still, even if the Federal government was meant to be inefficient as a way of checking its power and protecting that of the states, if the Federal government is limited in its function, does inefficiency hurt more than help? On the other hand, does the Constitution contains loopholes that allowed the Federal government to become the leviathan that it is, or were these changes tacked onto the original document?

Found the cached version at Google:

The U.S. Constitution is Not Democratic! (and why that’s a good thing)
Posted by Kevin Gutzman on February 18, 2008

A Review of Sanford Levinson, Our Undemocratic Constitution: Where the Constitution Goes Wrong (And How We the People Can Correct It). Oxford University Press, 2006.

Sanford Levinson is very upset. As he sees it, the United States Constitution fails to uphold the principles of the American nation, and something needs to be done about it. Our Undemocratic Constitution is his case for a national referendum on calling a new constitutional convention to revise the Constitution to bring it into the 21st century.

What are the principles the national Constitution is supposed to further? They include those of the Preamble, asserts Levinson. Insofar as it does not conduce to the achievement of “a more perfect union,” say, “promote the general welfare,” or “secure the blessings of liberty,” then, the Constitution needs to be changed.

Those are not the only principles Levinson identifies as fundamental. Also fundamental are equality and democracy. Levinson knows that these are fundamental, and the Constitution does not serve them, so it needs to be amended to allow them to be followed, too.

Levinson points to several provisions of the Constitution as contrary to principles such as equality and democracy. He is especially exercised about the structure of the U.S. Senate and of the Electoral College, each of which skews outcomes in favor of less populous states. This is undemocratic, says Levinson, and cannot be tolerated.

Why not? Well, because the small states are … small, because their populations are whiter than the country at large, and because they are less economically heterogeneous than the country at large. Levinson provides numerous examples of ways that the equal representation of states in the Senate affects federal allocation of expenditures and the shape of federal policies, and for him, this is a Bad Thing.

Why does Levinson consider this to be so terrible? Because of the obstacles it puts in the way of the population’s preferred policies. He does not say why more consistent adoption of the numerical majority’s preferred policies would be better, but merely takes it for granted. One must imagine that he has some reason, for he betrays a certain inconsistency in this regard.

Thus, for example, Levinson repeatedly expresses support for the de facto system of constitutional amendment by judges under which Americans have groaned for generations now, even as they were assured that the judges were actually obeying, and not simply ignoring, the Constitution. In fact, he says that what frustrates him about the structures of the U.S. Senate and the Electoral College is that no obvious way to have judges “correct” them (as they “corrected” the analogous structures of state senates in the 1960s) comes to mind.

In fact, Levinson’s entire case against the federal Constitution actually comes to this: we liberal legal academics, in tandem with federal judges, have succeeded in rewriting much of the federal Constitution to our liking through “interpretation,” but there are some elements of the document that the people ratified in the 1780s of which we cannot rid ourselves in that way, so now we need to adopt more radical measures.

It was not the people in the ratification process who opted for a national, rather than a federal, constitution. That was given them by such as Sanford Levinson. It was not the people who made the Preamble a statement of national principles instead of a statement of the purposes of a federal Constitution. That is being done for them by such as Sanford Levinson.

Or perhaps I give Levinson too much credit. Really, he does seem to be ignorant of much of the history I set out in The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Constitution. Then, what could one expect, as knowing the actual history of the Constitution is not a law professor’s stock-in-trade? Levinson does not deny this; in fact, he is the professor I mentioned in that book as having told one of his students that the reason his introductory class in constitutional law would not be reading any of The Federalist was that that book had nothing to do with constitutional law.

Yet, his disinterest in constitutional history impedes Levinson’s effort to make his case. Thus, for example, he opens the book with an extended passage from Thomas Jefferson lamenting people’s tendency to look to the Constitution’s framers as having had some special wisdom. Levinson refers to this passage later in the book, too. The reader can be forgiven for not knowing that the constitution Jefferson actually was campaigning to revise was not the U.S. Constitution, but the Virginia Constitution of 1776, because Levinson evidently does not know. There are other such historical errors in Levinson’s book, as well.

Levinson repeatedly describes his participation in constitutional conferences with senators and other eminences. One wonders why such people inquire of law professors concerning such matters, when legal training does not provide them with any special constitutional expertise, with any knowledge of the history of the writing and ratification of that document — only with mastery of a raft of (generally historically unfounded) judicial opinions.

The reason why the U.S. Constitution is not structured in the way that a national constitution would be is that it was not intended to create a national government. Majority rule is impeded throughout the system precisely because the states wanted the federal government to be inefficient; they feared that an efficient (national) government would strip them of their reserved powers. Silly fear, right?

As Levinson and his ilk have given the federal government the powers of a national one, it is they who have introduced distortions into the system. The method of selecting a truly federal chief executive, for example, or solely judicial judges, would not be a matter of much concern. It is because Levinson and Company agree that presidents must have untrammeled authority in foreign affairs and federal judges rightly may legislate that the methods of selecting them established by the Constitution seem inappropriate — to Levinson and Company.

Levinson would resolve this problem by going the whole way, by converting the federal government at last into a perfectly national one. He would begin via an unconstitutional referendum. Take note, you who do not worry over the tendency toward increasing judicial legislation: this is the impulse from which judicial legislation springs. Its urge is to have its way, and restraints on authority be damned!

Levinson does have one big point right: the current federal system is theoretically incoherent. One could correct for this fact by confining the federal legislature, the Congress, to the powers listed in the Constitution, chiefly in Article I, Section 8, as the Federalists said they would in the ratification debates in Virginia, New York, South Carolina, Massachusetts, and New York, and as the Tenth Amendment commands.

If apportionment of the Senate is a problem, one could correct for it by subdividing each of the mega-states, such as California, New York, Texas, Florida, Pennsylvania, and Illinois, into numerous smaller states. Not only would this provide more senators to the people who live there, but it also would make it easier for average citizens to affect state-level policy in the smaller states that would be the result. Significantly, this reform also would be perfectly constitutional.

Which helps to explain why Sanford Levinson will not endorse it.

Kevin R. C. Gutzman is the author of The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Constitution, Virginia’s American Revolution: From Dominion to Republic, 1776-1840, and, with Thomas E. Woods, Jr., Who Killed the Constitution?: The Fate of American Liberty from World War I to George W. Bush (forthcoming).

Churches

My friend the OD invited me to come to his church on Saturday. His church is a member of True Jesus Church. I had visited his church before, once or twice in high school, and been to several other events. I don't think I had been to his church since then, except for the rehearsal for his wedding and the actual wedding. This was the first time I had been to his church since it moved to a new building in Milpitas. OD's sister and her husband were there; his parents were down in LA to look at some land...

As you might be able to tell by the name, it's a Protestant church; I'm not sure how influenced it is by Pentacostalism, but the church does teach that there are two types of prayer: the prayer of understanding--praying in a language we can understand--and... spiritual prayer. Or praying in tongues. And since they think this is what the Bible demands of Christians, they literally keep the sabbath, having praise service on Saturday instead of Sunday.

As the OD's wife was leading Bible study after lunch, I decided to stay. It was, unsurprisingly, a Protestant reading of the Bible. We looked at the miraculous feeding of the multitude, as it was given in the Gospel of St. John (chapter 6); they understood the food that Christ offers to us as "spiritual" food [bread]. Catholics (and the Orthodox) see this as a reference to the Holy Eucharist. I wonder what their understanding of grace is. While I was sitting there listening to their talk about spiritual nourishment, I wonder if what they said is compatible with a Pelagian view of salvation. Prayer is important for the spiritual life, but we are always dependent upon God's grace--while it seems true that God will give us grace if we ask for it for the right reasons and motives, would He leave us in conditions of famine? Or is it more fitting that He be generous in His love? Are not the sacraments an outpouring of His love for us, sensible signs of His grace that perfect us in our love of Him? Perhaps they are too good to be true. But they are not mere Rominist superstition, as if apostolic Christians arbitrarily elevated some creature to the level of divine. What would the point of that be, since by we cannot fashion a creature which can elevate us to friendship with God and prefect us in that friendship? Are apostolic Christians that dumb? No, the dialogue needs to be brought back to the question of how God is present with us, and what He has done for us--we need to understand the Church, Tradition, the Sacraments in their divine origin. If we can impress upon Protestants the true extent of God's wisdom and His mercy, and what He has done for us, perhaps they will reconsider what the Church teaches about ecclesiology and the Sacraments and see how the teachings are "reasonable" in the light of Christ's mission.

His church is rather small, but there is a sense of fellowship. I have to admit though, I was uncomfortable being present while they were "praying" in tongues, and it does not seem like there is a point for me to visit frequently...

OD dropped by the park near the house afterwards with the two kids, while his wife was at choir practice, so I visited with them for a while. Then he took us to Smash City in Milpitas. OD still plays badminton; I don't know if I could get back into playing... learning some groundfighting skills on the other hand...

Today St. Joseph of Cupertino Church had a Mass for Chinese New Year and a special lunch afterwards. Bishop McGrath was in attendance during the liturgy; he also stayed for a part of the reception as well, but had to leave in order to celebrate a New Year liturgy for the San Jose Chinese Catholic Community. (Which has not had any vocations to the priesthood, not for the diocese, as far as I know, unlike the Korean and Vietnamese communities.)

KK's husband attended as well, having flew in yesterday, and we ate with Mr. and Mrs. C, who were also there.

veneration of one's ancestor rites, with offerings

Modern History Sourcebook: The Chinese Rites Controversy
“ The Chinese Rites Controversy: ”
MISSION WORK IN NON-ORTHODOX LANDS: ARE THERE LESSONS TO BE LEARNED FROM THE RITES CONTROVERSY

St. Ambrose was against the offering of food at the graves of one's ancestors, and once St. Augustine told St. Monica about this, she stopped the practice, though she didn't mean anything pagan by it. The Chinese have a similar practice during the Winter, and also when it is time to sweep the graves of one's relatives. I don't think St. Ambrose's reasoning is applicable only for Latins.

I can't find the actual text put out by the Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples in 1939, just the summary offered by Wiki; it appears that the offering of food is not sanctioned (but not explicitly forbidden either).

How grownups do marriage

Chapter VI: HOW GROWNUPS DO MARRIAGE

From "Grow Up! How Taking Responsiblity Can Make You a Happy Adult"
Golden Books/1998

Kurt Cobb, The lure of the city

The lure of the city

by Kurt Cobb

Yet the forces which have made all of this migration possible seem like they are coming to an end. The fabulous advances in food production of the last century are slowing. We are having a harder time keeping up with population growth. This is partly the result of a self-reinforcing loop in which more urban growth means more land for housing and infrastructure and the consequent destruction of fertile farmland needed to feed this growing population. The result of this and other factors has been that per capita grain yields which peaked in 1984 have actually declined. Yes, there is overall more food available; but the key figure--as anyone who has gone hungry can tell you--is food per person. Naturally, people eat things other than cereal grains. But for most of the world, cereal grains are the central source of food calories; some 80 percent of all calories eaten are in the form of grain products and the products of livestock fed on grains.

We face a litany of other problems as well: the overuse of underground and surface waters, the collapse of fisheries, climate change, deforestation, loss of biodiversity, toxic pollution, and the depletion of strategic minerals. In addition, the growth in world oil production appears to be stalling out. Yet, against this backdrop, waves of humanity keep washing into the world's cities.

It is like the momentum of the tides which take water further up onto the beach even as the gravitational force which brought that water there is waning. People continue to come into the cities despite all the challenges of doing so because the whole system--even as it frays at the edges--practically forces them to.

Those who are concerned about sustainability talk about making cities more sustainable. But that is an oxymoron. Cities have never been sustainable. They have always needed more from the land than the land under them could give. But the issue is more nuanced than that. On the one hand, living more densely in an energy-constrained world makes sense. It reduces travel for all purposes, economic and social. And, in the past people did live in walkable villages and towns. Some still do. But today, at least in North America, only those living in large cities can really do without a car.

I'd like to see a sustainability study of medieval cities--Mr. Cobb is criticizing all cities everywhere and all times. What is the minimum size that an association must have in order to be considered a city?

Michael Pollan: The omnivore's next dilemma

via EB

Michael Pollan: The omnivore's next dilemma (video)
Michael Pollan, TED
About this Talk
What if human consciousness isn't the end-all and be-all of Darwinism? What if we are all just pawns in corn's clever strategy game, the ultimate prize of which is world domination? Author Michael Pollan asks us to see things from a plant's-eye view -- to consider the possibility that nature isn't opposed to culture, that biochemistry rivals intellect as a survival tool. By merely shifting our perspective, he argues, we can heal the Earth. Who's the more sophisticated species now?

About Michael Pollan
Michael Pollan is the author of The Omnivore¢s Dilemma, in which he explains how our food not only affects our health but has far-reaching political, economic, and environmental implications. His new book is In Defense of Food.
(February 2008)

Citizenship: Ius soli or ius sanguinis

ius soli (wiki)
ius sanguinis (wiki)

John Médaille criticizes Ron Paul's latest ad: Ron Paul: Selling His Birthright

via the Western Confucian

On the other side: The case against birthright citizenship by Howard Sutherland

Should citizenship be something recognized by the states only, and not the Federal government? iirc, even back in the day of states' rights, a citizen of the U.S. was automatically recognized as such anywhere and could freely move to another state and still keep his citizenship. Isn't it difficult to maintain the state as a sovereign entity if citizenship was gained so freely? What incentive is there to stay in a state if one could move somewhere else and remain a citizen?

The underlying question is whether there should be any restrictions on citizenship (participation in governing/political office) as opposed to membership in a polity. What these restrictions are serve to distinguish monarchies, aristocracies, and polities from one another.