Wednesday, September 3, 2008
Dead Sea Scrolls on the internet
Scientists using American space technology have started a huge project to digitally photograph the Dead Sea Scrolls and post it on the Internet for all to see, Israeli authorities said Wednesday.
Tuesday, September 2, 2008
No Ruler. (Part 2)
Reject, resist, organize, work, oppose, and directly confront.
These are the unifying goals of the RNC Welcoming Committee and at their root, admirable. I surfed their FAQ section and found references to the Anarchist FAQ online here. Which, to my understanding hopes to see libertarian Socialism replace any and all systems of government.
Instead of "central planning," which many people associate with the word "socialism," These anarchists advocate free association and co-operation between individuals, workplaces and communities and so oppose "state" socialism. But there remains the collective ownership of production and the means of production. At least that is my present and far to brief summary.
However, this still seems like an upside hierarchy to me, even if from the ground up and if run by humans, prone to corruption. Not that anyone of these adherents would disagree. They might and counterclaim that their system still provides for the best and least destructive correction, being local, tribal, decentralized and by free association.
Self-management, All would agree but especially for anarchists, is essential to ensure freedom within the organisations so needed for any decent human existence.
And there is the rub. While I agree with a lot of what I read and continue to read among anarchists the essential point for me lies in the sinfulness of men. We seek to rule over the other. 'Archist', in a sense, that is make primary ourselves. We cannot remove that bent in our system even if we remove all the tools and positions of government. Ours is a self management problem.
As a Christian anarchist, I seek to make none Archy but God, God revealed in Jesus. Anything that attempts to fulfill that role must be confronted. Beginning primarily with myself.
The hope is not in deconstructing any system for anarchy's sake but for the Lord. The key ingredient in that struggle being the proclamation of the gospel through non-violent means. Precisely through non-violent means. A radical, self giving discipleship.
Which is why I must reject the anarchists of the welcoming party. While I may or may not agree with their assessment, I ultimately cannot join them. But nor must I then default to some political party, or the lesser of 2, 4, or 8 evils.
The commitment to the way overrides in all and that way is still one of direct confrontation with all archy's, all powers that set themselves up. But the righteousness of the way lays not even in being non-violent but in depending upon God in all things. A dependence on what He has, is and will do as I put myself into what some would declare as harms way.
I'll continue to try and expand upon this idea but one final comment for now.
Consider the protest in St. Paul itself. A few disrupted for many, a protest. Lets grant for the sake of argument that the free association of these people was noble and fair and just. It was reduced to violence by those within their own ranks. The noble aims of the organizing itself failed to protect from the few who made themselves an authority by breaking things and inviting violence in response. Would any society created by men do any better? Could guarantee against reaction and overreaction by parties within and those opposed? Did those who failed to heed the main groups warnings, against their own anarchist standards, set themselves up as their own authorities and ruin what was a collective ideal?
James 4:2 You desire and do not have, so you murder. You covet and cannot obtain, so you fight and quarrel. You do not have, because you do not ask.
These are the unifying goals of the RNC Welcoming Committee and at their root, admirable. I surfed their FAQ section and found references to the Anarchist FAQ online here. Which, to my understanding hopes to see libertarian Socialism replace any and all systems of government.
Instead of "central planning," which many people associate with the word "socialism," These anarchists advocate free association and co-operation between individuals, workplaces and communities and so oppose "state" socialism. But there remains the collective ownership of production and the means of production. At least that is my present and far to brief summary.
However, this still seems like an upside hierarchy to me, even if from the ground up and if run by humans, prone to corruption. Not that anyone of these adherents would disagree. They might and counterclaim that their system still provides for the best and least destructive correction, being local, tribal, decentralized and by free association.
Self-management, All would agree but especially for anarchists, is essential to ensure freedom within the organisations so needed for any decent human existence.
And there is the rub. While I agree with a lot of what I read and continue to read among anarchists the essential point for me lies in the sinfulness of men. We seek to rule over the other. 'Archist', in a sense, that is make primary ourselves. We cannot remove that bent in our system even if we remove all the tools and positions of government. Ours is a self management problem.
As a Christian anarchist, I seek to make none Archy but God, God revealed in Jesus. Anything that attempts to fulfill that role must be confronted. Beginning primarily with myself.
The hope is not in deconstructing any system for anarchy's sake but for the Lord. The key ingredient in that struggle being the proclamation of the gospel through non-violent means. Precisely through non-violent means. A radical, self giving discipleship.
Which is why I must reject the anarchists of the welcoming party. While I may or may not agree with their assessment, I ultimately cannot join them. But nor must I then default to some political party, or the lesser of 2, 4, or 8 evils.
The commitment to the way overrides in all and that way is still one of direct confrontation with all archy's, all powers that set themselves up. But the righteousness of the way lays not even in being non-violent but in depending upon God in all things. A dependence on what He has, is and will do as I put myself into what some would declare as harms way.
I'll continue to try and expand upon this idea but one final comment for now.
Consider the protest in St. Paul itself. A few disrupted for many, a protest. Lets grant for the sake of argument that the free association of these people was noble and fair and just. It was reduced to violence by those within their own ranks. The noble aims of the organizing itself failed to protect from the few who made themselves an authority by breaking things and inviting violence in response. Would any society created by men do any better? Could guarantee against reaction and overreaction by parties within and those opposed? Did those who failed to heed the main groups warnings, against their own anarchist standards, set themselves up as their own authorities and ruin what was a collective ideal?
James 4:2 You desire and do not have, so you murder. You covet and cannot obtain, so you fight and quarrel. You do not have, because you do not ask.
An-Archos; No Ruler
Since I've used the word anarchy here, specifically Christian Anarchist, something needs to be said concerning the demonstrations outside the RNC convention in St. Paul, Minnesota and the so-called anarchists there and how I view them.
First, what exactly IS happening there? I direct your attention to a few links.
This reporter claims to have been embedded with the trouble making "group" all day. Most were an assortment of pacifists, anti-war protesters and left-wing activists who were peacefully protesting and demonstrating which is well within their right to do. When a handful of "kids" began to knock over newspaper stands and sidewalk garbage cans (That's showing the MAN!), most in the main group stopped to pick up the mess and tell them to knock it off. Predictably, they didn't.
"On one street, a few people threw down caltrops to block traffic. One kid who looked under 20 years old jumped on top of a cop car that broke through the pedestrian barrier. Another two smashed windows of a Macy’s, First National Bank, and unoccupied cop car. However, this was the work of maybe five or so people in the breakaway protest group." - MOLLY PRIESMEYER, Minnesota Independent.
Fine, says you, but this media outlet has an agenda. Ok...
WKBT is reporting that an Associated Press photographer as well as Amy Goodman of Democracy Now fame were swept up in the police crackdown that netted over 250 arrests. They and many others were subsequently released. "St. Paul Mayor Chris Coleman says the vast majority of people who marched did so peacefully. He says it's unfortunate that, quote, "those voices were somewhat muted by the criminal activities of a handful of folks." (emphasis mine)
Apparently the Connecticut Delegation came under "attack" as only Fox news could put it, while exiting a bus.
Of the groups listed as being present, only the "Funk the War" group and the "Food Not Bombs" group seems to have been the troublesome ones, and this is exactly the group the reporter above was embedded in. They were also allegedly connected to the "RNC welcoming committee" which was the focus of the police raids prior to the convention. She claims there were about 60 or so of them (compared to FOX News's 200), and of them, only a handful that were unaffiliated and claiming to be anarchists.
So, we are talking of 5-10 people along one route in a crowd of 10,000. There actions however seemed to have caused the large police force to react, and some would say overreact, and begin to forcefully clear the streets which netted many peaceful and innocent people. Many of these people are being released albeit on a case-by-case basis. They threw the net and decided to catch what they could and sort later. Lets face it, lots of people attend these things to see just what might happen, myself included. I'll refrain from commenting on the police presence, perimeter and response for now.
My concern at the moment are these anarchist/anti-authoritarian "welcoming committee" people and who are they since they have the label of anarchist?
Well, according to their website they have 6 points of unity. This is the cached version of the page in case someone pulls the site down. Here they are...
1. A rejection of Capitalism, Imperialism, and the State;
2. Resist the commodification of our shared and living Earth;
3. Organize on the principles of decentralization, autonomy, sustainability, and mutual aid;
4. Work to end all relationships of domination and subjugation, including but not limited to those rooted in patriarchy, race, class, and homophobia;
5. Oppose the police and prison-industrial complex, and maintain solidarity with all targets of state repression;
6. Directly confront systems of oppression, and respect the need for a diversity of tactics.
Having established some (by no means all encompassing) sense of the on the ground situation, I'll next take on those 6 points and more importantly what isn't in any of them.
First, what exactly IS happening there? I direct your attention to a few links.
This reporter claims to have been embedded with the trouble making "group" all day. Most were an assortment of pacifists, anti-war protesters and left-wing activists who were peacefully protesting and demonstrating which is well within their right to do. When a handful of "kids" began to knock over newspaper stands and sidewalk garbage cans (That's showing the MAN!), most in the main group stopped to pick up the mess and tell them to knock it off. Predictably, they didn't.
"On one street, a few people threw down caltrops to block traffic. One kid who looked under 20 years old jumped on top of a cop car that broke through the pedestrian barrier. Another two smashed windows of a Macy’s, First National Bank, and unoccupied cop car. However, this was the work of maybe five or so people in the breakaway protest group." - MOLLY PRIESMEYER, Minnesota Independent.
Fine, says you, but this media outlet has an agenda. Ok...
WKBT is reporting that an Associated Press photographer as well as Amy Goodman of Democracy Now fame were swept up in the police crackdown that netted over 250 arrests. They and many others were subsequently released. "St. Paul Mayor Chris Coleman says the vast majority of people who marched did so peacefully. He says it's unfortunate that, quote, "those voices were somewhat muted by the criminal activities of a handful of folks." (emphasis mine)
Apparently the Connecticut Delegation came under "attack" as only Fox news could put it, while exiting a bus.
Of the groups listed as being present, only the "Funk the War" group and the "Food Not Bombs" group seems to have been the troublesome ones, and this is exactly the group the reporter above was embedded in. They were also allegedly connected to the "RNC welcoming committee" which was the focus of the police raids prior to the convention. She claims there were about 60 or so of them (compared to FOX News's 200), and of them, only a handful that were unaffiliated and claiming to be anarchists.
So, we are talking of 5-10 people along one route in a crowd of 10,000. There actions however seemed to have caused the large police force to react, and some would say overreact, and begin to forcefully clear the streets which netted many peaceful and innocent people. Many of these people are being released albeit on a case-by-case basis. They threw the net and decided to catch what they could and sort later. Lets face it, lots of people attend these things to see just what might happen, myself included. I'll refrain from commenting on the police presence, perimeter and response for now.
My concern at the moment are these anarchist/anti-authoritarian "welcoming committee" people and who are they since they have the label of anarchist?
Well, according to their website they have 6 points of unity. This is the cached version of the page in case someone pulls the site down. Here they are...
1. A rejection of Capitalism, Imperialism, and the State;
2. Resist the commodification of our shared and living Earth;
3. Organize on the principles of decentralization, autonomy, sustainability, and mutual aid;
4. Work to end all relationships of domination and subjugation, including but not limited to those rooted in patriarchy, race, class, and homophobia;
5. Oppose the police and prison-industrial complex, and maintain solidarity with all targets of state repression;
6. Directly confront systems of oppression, and respect the need for a diversity of tactics.
Having established some (by no means all encompassing) sense of the on the ground situation, I'll next take on those 6 points and more importantly what isn't in any of them.
Chrome
So I downloaded Google's new browser, Chrome and I'm taking it for a spin. Very nice. Sleek. Streamlined and fast. I really like that if a tab or window freezes up it doesn't freeze up the browser. Each tab has it's own task manager.
Download was fast and so was the import of files from the explorer browser.
So far so good. I like.
Trying out the incognito browsing feature...
Wow, I accidentally closed a tab while viewing a web page I hadn't been to before. When I immediately opened a new tab, it had a history of all the pages I had recently visited with small previews of each page, a history search engine and a listing of recently bookmarked and closed sites. All very easy to navigate and with no cluttering. Maybe FireFox and others have this feature, I don't know. I never tried them.
Sweet.
Download was fast and so was the import of files from the explorer browser.
So far so good. I like.
Trying out the incognito browsing feature...
Wow, I accidentally closed a tab while viewing a web page I hadn't been to before. When I immediately opened a new tab, it had a history of all the pages I had recently visited with small previews of each page, a history search engine and a listing of recently bookmarked and closed sites. All very easy to navigate and with no cluttering. Maybe FireFox and others have this feature, I don't know. I never tried them.
Sweet.
Monday, September 1, 2008
Geraldo vs. Gustav
This page has 4 live streaming videos of local coverage of Gustav for those that, like me, can only take so much of the national media outlets coverage. Sending all of them "Straight to Angola" might be the first step in saving the area from "monsterous", "explosive", and other wildly hyperbolic phrases. Good gravy.
I actually saw close ups of puddles forming at some point late last night. PUDDLES!
That's not to say there is not severe and widespread damage but puddles? Really?
Link via Suds & Soliloquies.
I actually saw close ups of puddles forming at some point late last night. PUDDLES!
That's not to say there is not severe and widespread damage but puddles? Really?
Link via Suds & Soliloquies.
Labor day
This is one of the first Labor days that I can recall actually being off. And so, in an effort to be still be productive, I've been pouring over Ellul's Money & Power. The book is insightful and the following excerpt not only seems appropiate but has me reeling...(From page 38 in the chapter titled wealth in the Old Testament.)
After Abraham's victory over Chedarlaomer, who had plundered Sodom and Gomorrah, all this wealth is in Abraham’s hands. The king of Sodom gives it to him.
"The king of Sodom said to Abram: 'Give me the persons, but take the goods for yourself" (Gen. 14:21). Abraham answered the king of Sodom:
"I have sworn to the LORD God Most High, maker of heaven and earth,
that I would not take a thread or a sandal-thong or anything that is yours,
lest you should say, 'I have made Abram rich.’ I will take nothing but
what the young men have eaten, and the share of the men who went
with me; let Aner, Eshcol, and Mamre take their share'" (Gen. 14:22-24).
In Abraham's refusal, we see first his concern not to depend on man for wealth. The way he formulates his refusal shows that he is not acting for merely political reasons, as we too easily conclude; he does not refuse because he is afraid this gift will ally him with the king of Sodom, but because of the Lord. Because the Lord is master of heaven and earth, Abraham can accept nothing from anyone else. To receive wealth from someone else is to deny God's lordship. To try to make money by whatever means possible, to give it first place in one's affections, to extract it from work or from war, is not to recognize this lordship, which cannot be simply a comforting word but it must be an attested reality.
After Abraham's victory over Chedarlaomer, who had plundered Sodom and Gomorrah, all this wealth is in Abraham’s hands. The king of Sodom gives it to him.
"The king of Sodom said to Abram: 'Give me the persons, but take the goods for yourself" (Gen. 14:21). Abraham answered the king of Sodom:
"I have sworn to the LORD God Most High, maker of heaven and earth,
that I would not take a thread or a sandal-thong or anything that is yours,
lest you should say, 'I have made Abram rich.’ I will take nothing but
what the young men have eaten, and the share of the men who went
with me; let Aner, Eshcol, and Mamre take their share'" (Gen. 14:22-24).
In Abraham's refusal, we see first his concern not to depend on man for wealth. The way he formulates his refusal shows that he is not acting for merely political reasons, as we too easily conclude; he does not refuse because he is afraid this gift will ally him with the king of Sodom, but because of the Lord. Because the Lord is master of heaven and earth, Abraham can accept nothing from anyone else. To receive wealth from someone else is to deny God's lordship. To try to make money by whatever means possible, to give it first place in one's affections, to extract it from work or from war, is not to recognize this lordship, which cannot be simply a comforting word but it must be an attested reality.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)