The Sony Caper

Mr. Dick Move himself makes his mark on the entertainment industry

You can usually tell when there's an event that historians will cite as turning points, such as Pearl Harbor or 9/11. Then there are some events that people at the time miss. IMHO, the Sony hack is going to be one of those turning points that weren't recognized on day one.  

Sony is now receiving criticism for pulling The Interview. That's really minor compared to the hack-damage that's been done to Sony. Whether The Interview has been pulled from distribution or not is insignificant.

Why? Because I think is Sony is out of business anyway, at least their entertainment division, which is already earthshaking. This hack has left the company a crumbling wreck, their losses are in the hundreds of millions and counting, probably as much as a half-billion dollars. That's much more significant to free speech and everything else than any bravery Sony shows now. Hackers have shown they can totally ruin a major multinational company. This is a done deal no matter what happens with The Interview. 

It looks like the GofP will have to deal with whoever gets Sony's assets in receivership. I doubt that extortionist demands are recognized as obligations by bankruptcy courts.

This attack was so thorough, I'm wondering if it's just the North Koreans who are behind it, because this is a major shot to the MPAA and their anti-Piracy policy. It's shown Hollywood that retaliations for censoring the Internet will hurt it. 

(I'm not being pro-Piracy there, I'm just against the heavy handed measures proposed in SOPA.)

Now that a major corporation has been wounded through hacking and higher ups will lose their jobs over this, it's going to send an earthquake through Hollywood, which is going to have a vast effect of entertainment. This, however, will spread through the corporate community. Online security is going to become almost ridiculous. I can see companies going "off the grid" because of this. Paper and mail will make a comeback.  There will be a federal agency or several created just to deal with Internet security and investigations.

If it can happen to a major corporation, it can happen to anyone. Independent film makers, documentary makers, are going to have to have an extra layer of brave, and an Internet security person to keep them in business. Possibly.
 
It's impossible to say in the long run how this is going to work out for free speech and creativity. Because that depends also on the response to this event.

It looks like North Korea has left its mark on pop culture.  

Why Does Racism Persist?

I'm not a sociologist or psychologist, but I'd like someone in those disciplines to look into an observation that I've made. I'm beginning to think the policing of Black neighborhoods fuels White racism against Blacks. It skews White perceptions of Black violence, and even generates felonies out of minor incidences, which are cited by Whites as evidence that Blacks are a violent menace.  

I believe the policing practices must be changed, and not only because of the egregious loss of life and abnegation of civil rights for Blacks. I think the way Black neighborhoods are policed not only oppresses and creates danger for them, but that it drives a cycle of racism.

The skewed arrests from the extreme policing create the perception that Black neighborhoods are out of control "war zones." This has an immediate effect on police that makes them crack down harder and be more aggressive. This in turn puts the Black citizens there on edge and raises the general tension level. Meanwhile, the White police--who after all--have friends and family, communicate the danger to the rest of the White community. This in turn feeds the White people's perceptions of Black violence and fuels more racism. This is reinforced by the media, who sell a perception of crime. They take police accounts of incidents exactly as the police feed it to them. As the policing, and the racist feedback fuels White racism, the following generations of police are taken from the very communities conditioned to be racist.

IMHO, the over-policing is a self-fulfilling prophecy; the police being there cracking down on crime actually make things more unsafe, and it skews the officers' own attitudes toward the people policed. 

Americans, especially White Americans, are fixated on police. Much of our news is about crime. In Pop Culture, so much of our films, TV Shows and fiction literature are about police. While it's true that some of these give a negative picture of some police, the very fact that so many of our dramas are drawn from law enforcement says something about the importance we give it. This also feeds back the message that a career in law enforcement will make a person important.

Many police at least lean conservative. Among the White police, they're drawn from the very population of segregated suburban people most affected by stories of policing Black neighborhoods. Police candidates tend to be people who see disrespect of authority as being a main problem, and not coincidentally, they themselves want to be the authority that's obeyed.

Now, think about this: in St. Charles County, a White person can go weeks without seeing one Black person. What somebody's friend or relative in law enforcement says has both authority and persistence in the rumor mill. It's precisely the stories the officers tell when they come home that condition the neighborhoods toward racism. It also matters how, in their private lives, the officers refer to the people they're policing. If they call them n*gg*rs you can bet that gets passed on. The next generation of law enforcement is informed and conditioned by these authority figures.   
The results are, in almost any discussion group over the current racial conflicts, you'll have a White commentator say, "Why doesn't the media report on Black on White crime?" (Because over 80 percent of violent crime against Whites is perpetrated by other Whites); Or "Why don't they demonstrate against Black on Black crime?" (Because they'd be petitioning for the criminal element to become democratically responsive, which is a joke, when our police are supposed to be.) They make other, more shamelessly ignorant and racist remarks. They are totally misinformed, most likely by law enforcement people talking about their work.

In the last four months, we've seen the country drawn apart due to egregious murders by White police officers of Black males. The flagship example, Darren Wilson's shooting of Michael Brown, is illustrative. It's perfectly plain that if Darren Wilson had to defend himself at the scene, he was no longer defending himself when he took the last three shots, the fatal ones, especially when the distance from Wilson's SUV is considered (148 feet, as they measure it out in this video). Most Whites do not even ask that question, do not care to hear it.

The difference of opinion between Blacks and Whites about this incident comes down to this: Whites give Darren Wilson the right to take three extra shots under the auspices of self-defense even if they're informed that he "technically" did it because he was pissed off. They do it specifically to give other police the discretion, courtesy and BOD to control the "Black Menace."  

This is true in all recent examples of police shooting unarmed, sometimes totally innocent Black males. The no indictment vote against the officers who used a lethal choke-hold against Eric Garner was egregious given that the video plainly showed Garner was at most an anticipated danger, not a real one. Like Ferguson, it was a case of police taking a misdemeanor and turning it into a fatality. But even when taken to that extreme, Whites consider that police having such extreme discretion when dealing with Blacks to be reasonable given the importance and danger. Therefore, they call it self-defense even when it plainly wasn't.

Police having broad powers to defend themselves is ironic considering law enforcement is statistically not one of the most dangerous jobs. Also, it's apparently getting safer. Statistically, there are fewer deaths and injuries for police officers than there have been since the eighties. One could never draw that conclusion from what officers say about their work in Black neighborhoods and how they must have what amounts to the power of summary execution just to stay safe.




Yet, there've been millions of recent examples on social media of Whites absolving police officers for using deadly force when the danger was questionable and definitely not dire. Even when the police officers' stories are demonstrated false by video, even when nine other witnesses contradict the officer's testimony. Yet, in almost any discussion group over the current racial matters, you'll have a White commentator say, "Why doesn't the media report on Black on White crime?" (Because over 80 percent of violent crime against Whites is perpetrated by other Whites); Or "Why don't they demonstrate against Black on Black crime?" (Because they'd be petitioning for the criminal element to become democratically responsive, when our police are supposed to be.) They'd make other, more shamelessly racist remarks.

I never thought we'd still be struggling with racism in the twenty-first century. Maybe the focus should have always been on policing rather than enforced segregation. Discrimination will always be with us, but racism doesn't have to be.

Grand Jury Aftermath

I was right about the Grand Jury decision, wrong about waiting until the coldest, snowiest day they could to have the Grand Jury vote on Darren Wilson's case. They might have waited until January, but I did say the Grand Jury probably couldn't stand it that long. No coincidence, in my mind, that they voted on it right before the holiday season started.

I really thought it would stay peaceful afterward, I guess because I really hoped for that. But, as the night progressed, and I was listening to police radio, it became apparent that things were quickly going to Hell. Ferguson sounded like it went into full riot with arson, looting and gunshots. There was less of that in and around the city's Shaw neighborhood, though in the Central West End, two officers were shot. 

I might have predicted that any investigation based on evidence gathered by Darren Wilson's buddies, while they were wearing "I am Darren Wilson" bracelets, was going to have absolutely zero credibility.

As long as the police feel they have so much latitude to kill people, protests like this are not going to stop.

Afterthought: The Huffington post said that grand juries declining an indictment was exceedingly rare: out of 168,000 federal cases taken to a grand jury, on 11 were voted "No Indictment."

Now I know why the assistant prosecutor (and everybody else I met in that office) hated me so much. I think maybe eleven cases were probably declined in just my term as foreman! I probably ruined her career.

Good! 

Darren Wilson Grand Jury Predictions

First, I'll say, I hope above all else that there is no violence due to the verdict. I've always thought there was no way Darren Wilson would be indicted. Violence in the face of this would aggravate the fear that makes the majority so irrational about racism. Conservatism, and its partners, fascism and racism are all based on fear. I hope people continue to protest, and don't let this die. But I hope it can be accomplished without picking a losing fight.

I think the grand jury has already reached its decision, and Darren Wilson has already been declared not indicted.  I judge that by reports of police readiness and the speech by the governor. If it's in any way legal to withhold the verdict from public release, or to ask the Grand Jury to delay their "official" vote, I think that's what they're doing.

Now, prosecutor Bob McCulloch has given them until January to reach one. When I heard that months ago, I thought they were going to time the announcement of the verdict with the worst weather possible. They hope to use a blizzard to suppress the violence they anticipate. That would be the smartest thing to do.

But how long can the Grand Jury stand it? Having been a foreman, I'll testify that Grand Jury duty isn't easy. Sitting on a case like this, especially if it has been decided in all but formality, must be terrible. So, though it might be the intelligent thing to delay announcement of a "no bill" verdict for coming of the next polar vortex, the human element might interfere.

I never thought there was a chance in Hell Wilson would be indicted. There was no incident report, the crime scene evidence was not properly collected.  I think Wilson's guilty, simply because his story of what happened doesn't make sense, and I know that cops lie and fudge things all the time, in front of Grand Juries and especially when covering their asses. Yes, despite my strong suspicions, I couldn't vote him guilty if I were on a jury.

The criminal justice system being what it is, it was never realistic for protesters to demand that, not realistic in the sense that a crime investigation can't be bent to political demand. It may get bent against Black suspects all the time, but that's what the protestors are seeking to end.

Wilson won't be indicted not because he didn't commit manslaughter, but because I know how grand juries think. The least contradiction in civilian witness testimony is going to be taken as evidence that all their testimony is unreliable. In absence of really good physical evidence (like a video) Wilson's story is going to be considered the most reliable. Meanwhile, general principles like "innocent until proven guilty" will carry the day. 

But mostly it's because Wilson and his buddies have already put the evidential fix in. They're lack of investigation into Michael Brown's death already decided the "no bill" verdict by this grand jury.

Therefore, it's counterproductive to make political demands on the criminal justice system. However, the protesters can demand that the Ferguson Police department pay for what it's done. They should demand that it be decommissioned and everybody be fired. Put it out of business.

Ouch! Break My Crossed Fingers

"Those voters look fraudulent!" --The GOP

Well, break my crossed fingers. This election was as horrifying as Carrie White's prom. I really see a door closing now. This was our last chance to change Citizens' United, our last chance to stop Republicans from their targeted disenfranchisement of Democratic voters. Call me bitter, but I think that after the GOP knocked millions of Democratic voters off the rolls across the country, their victory in this election was sealed. Gerrymandering, the Koch Brothers, and Citizens' United did the rest.

I don't believe the Supreme Court didn't stop Texas from disenfranchising 600,000 voters, likely Democratic voters. For that ruling alone, I thinking people should spit Scalia's name and picture where ever they see it for the next century.

I'm convinced that elections in the US will joke from here on out. Conservatives have the upper hand now, and they're choosing to bring us back to the good ol' days, which for them was Jim Crow and the Gilded Age.

What surprises me is how little these tactics have been mentioned as the cause of the election bloodbath on progressive sites like Dailykos and The Huffington Post. I guess if denial gets you through the day. After Carrie has slammed the doors, you might as well just enjoy a dance with your date.

Fingers crossed.

The weather here in St. Louis is cold and rainy. Just miserable. It's just the sort of weather that will swing a midterm election to the Republicans. I went to vote this morning. I aggravated my ankle again over the weekend while gargoyle watching (see my personal blog Life After Shocks). So, I had to walk eight blocks to get to the poling station, a community center. Fortunately, I got to do a little shopping for necessities while I was there.

My state, Missouri, will have very limited impact on the nationwide results. We have neither the governor nor a senator in a race. For most other states, however, if there is one midterm election Democrats need to vote in, it's this one. If the senate turns Republican, as the odds are saying it will, we might anticipate a crisis. Also, if they capture the senate after what they've done, and haven't done, since 2012, truly the connections among the voting booth, morality and justice have been cut.

The Republicans now can't win the popular vote, and their strategy for holding on to power is to selectively suppress the vote and gerrymander. The conservative majority on the SCOTUS has given its approval to both. Apparently, SCOTUS conservatives think of the Gilded Age and Jim Crow not only as the good ol' days, but as exactly what the Founders had in mind. As a result, perhaps seven million people have been disenfranchised this election. If that doesn't make Democratic voters angry enough to show up at the polls, then the Democrats are truly a party of losers. Fact is, reversing all the damage will only get harder in subsequent elections.

At least this morning I saw some sign that voters are taking this election seriously. The turnout looked quite good despite the rain. There was actually a line. The number of votes tallied in the paper machine read 82, and there's was probably an equal amount of electronic votes.

So, I'm cautiously optimistic that the Democrats might retain the senate, and get the majority of governors. I'll see after my writers' meeting tonight.

Eugenics and the Myth of Racial Superiority

Internet commentary has certainly demolished some myths. One of them is that we're in a post-racial society, or anything like one. You can cite the millions of openly bigoted comments, especially those made after Barrack Obama's election in 2008. Besides the ARWP's, there's a whole host of commentators and trolls that don't even try to hedge or redefine their racism anymore.

This does have the pretense of being scientific, but there's no credibility to it. First of all, six cubic inches is huge. Asians would need a second head for that. Even if the poster used the wrong units, the average brain volume (according to Wikipedia, for a quick answer) is 1260 cubic centimeters. Six cubic  centimeters would be within the margin of error of that figure. In other words, insignificant.

Second, everything one talks about with genetics--with all of science really-- is a matter of probabilities. At best, discrimination judges someone not where their abilities fall, but where they're guessed likely fall.

Third, intelligence is not a well-defined term.

However, eugenics itself is flawed to its very core. It's not actually "Survival of the fittest." Evolution doesn't select for the best traits. It selects for ones that are best for survival and reproduction in the organism's environment. This seldom matches what a human being would consider an improvement. Such as, when human beings learned to cook, we began to get crooked teeth, because the genetics for well-meshed teeth were no longer needed, and the resource expenditure to make teeth straight and keep jaws strong was unnecessary. This is not something that eugenicists would consider superior. 

Therefore, a eugenic dictator is likely to choose "superior" traits that suck in the environment that his subjects actually have to live in--since life is inherently unpredictable. So, eugenics would reduce survival and reproductive success. 

I'm not sure if anybody else has this reaction, but whenever I hear of the eugenicists of the late 19th and and early 20th century (and during that time, almost every well-educated Caucasian who came of age then was a eugenicist) I'm struck by how naive they were. The whole reason the ideology was evil was that it would cause a lot of suffering, and for nothing, because it wouldn't work. Anybody who understands Darwinism now knows that. It's better to let the environment tell our genes what it wants. That's what genes exist for.

So, any claim of racial status based on so-called science is fraudulent. At best, it's a biology dropout who would make the claim. 

Protesters Unemployed?

On snide remarks that many of the Ferguson protesters are unemployed, most of the critiques are unaware of the irony conveyed: that only the unemployed can afford a conscience.

To sneer at the Ferguson protesters requires a callous of racist cynicism.

The Supreme Court Lays An(other) Egg

The Supreme Court has allowed Texas to keep 600,000 people from voting. Most are minorities. Most are, presumably, voting Democratic. This is not just a bad ruling, it's a crooked one. Like Bush vs. Gore. Like voter ID laws themselves, this just reeks of political opportunism trumping the strict constructionism all of the conservative justices preached.  

These five awful justices, Roberts, Scalia, Aleto, Kennedy and Thomas, really do believe that Jim Crow and the Gilded Age were both the good ol' days and exactly what Founders had in mind (short of Plan A: slavery). I really believe the only thing they'd correct about that utopia is to make it more religious (Christian that is).

 We're getting the worst Supreme Court in history at a time we could least afford it: i.e. right after the wort presidency in history. This court is gift from Bush and his dad (for those who thought he was any good). At the same time, we have the worst Congress in history. The country won't survive too much more of this onslaught of corruption supported by demented stupidity. And if you look at the growing secessionism in the polls, that's probably a contingency plan.

The joke will be on conservative voters: they'll depart from a nation they ruined to be governed by state governments that are worse.

Like Criminals Respect their Communities' Wishes?

A New Orlean's protest against Black on Black violence, January 11, 2007. There have at least nine other major protests in that city since 2006, and hundreds in most major US cities.

I'm picking this up from my last entry, where I defined the term ARWP, short for Ambiguously Racist White People. I'll alternately call them sometimes ARs for Ambiguous Racists, or ARRs for Ambiguously Racist Reactionaries. 

An Acronym for Posts to Follow

Ferguson protest in Clayton (the seat of St. Louis county).

(Disclaimer: I'm White and male. I'm committed to ending both racism and sexism and exposing the myths and pretensions that keep the two socially potent.)

I needed a term for discriminating white people who maintain that their moderate racism isn't racist. The sort who are proud that their use of the n*gg*r to describe a low-life white person shows such racial enlightenment. They cite the lack of white hoods in their closets as conclusive proof that their refusal to think about hiring a Black person has nothing to do with race. The ones who won't let the color of a person's skin bother them, but clothes, language and names are all fair game; and the ones of Black people disgust them the most of all, merely by coincidence. The sort who always make damn sure they always have one or two Black friends so when they're accused of racism, they can always cite him, and (don't forget!) his family as some of his best friends.

For now I'll settle for Ambiguously Racist White People, or ARWP's. Or perhaps just ARs. I've been having run-ins with a lot of them recently on social media. The Riverfront Times Facebook Page. I needed to develop a term before I dove into it. I don't want to paint White people with too broad a brush, do I?
 

A Day that should Live in Infamy

Christopher Columbus: mug shot

 My thoughts on C-Day: Columbus was both immoral and lame. He was wrong, utterly wrong about his discovery. He mis-named the people he discovered, thus causing centuries of confusion. What he found out, he did by accident. His voyage was not difficult. He blundered into the fastest way to the Americas and the fastest way back from sheer luck. (For a heroic voyage that tested human fortitude, see Magellan, who discovered something more remarkable than the Americas, the Pacific Ocean.) 

He was agent of a couple of fanatical, theocratic tyrants, who were otherwise busy committing genocide and religious cleansing on Jews and Muslims. When he arrived, he immediately allowed his men to rape and plunder from the natives, thus setting European-American relations for the likes of Cortez and Pizarro. When couldn't find gold he made his discovery profitable by abducting the Native Americans into slavery. Yes, slavery in the New World started with Columbus. There is really nothing good about the guy.

If there's anyone who should be remembered from the early colonial period, it should be Tisquantum, known to the English as Squanto. After being abducted into slavery, then escaping and coming to find his whole village wiped out from an epidemics accidentally brought by European, he still saved the Puritan's lives.

That shows a superhuman capacity to forgive, that's worthy of being remembered for centuries. He should be the best known person from the whole Euro-America colonial disaster. That's who the European-Americans should commemorate, at least in North America. And it should be a holiday where we ask for forgiveness. 

Instead, he's almost forgotten and buried in an unmarked grave.

Moreover, there are various myths that most everyone believes about American Colonization. To have them corrected, you have to go to a comedy website.

Racism in St Louis

Michael Brown, The outrage (Click on Picture for full article)