301. ScottLoar - July 22, 1999 - 7:30 AM PT
re Message #298, clever comment for which I haven't a good retort, so let me sound the charge of 100,000 Chicagoans as we storm your Elysian Fields in Michigan during the summer months.
re Message #300, the operative adjective is "general" as in common and not the tastes of the average BMW driver in NY. And produce from farmer's markets in the eager hands of incompetents is still food ill-prepared. No amount of aged balsamic vinegar can salvage what passes for salad on most American tables.
Add a diet Coke to that menu.
302. spudboy - July 22, 1999 - 8:24 AM PT
Well, the book finally received some notice from the local press in Seattle today: Seattle Times article.
303. ScottLoar - July 22, 1999 - 9:12 AM PT
Spudboy, the article seemed a fairly even report and not a review. I thought there was but one clearly uncharitable comment (something to the effect that this book was the best around until a better one comes along - could be said of The Bible, too) but looking at the insouciant attitude of the commentator I think you did fairly well by him.
I have a Japanese-American friend, Nissei actually from Hawaii, 62+- years old, who intended to visit Montana or Idaho with his wife but their daughter who is a flight attendant on Aloha Airlines discouraged them by noting the ultra-nationalist crazies who abound there. In some quarters, it seems, these extremists are fairly well-known.
304. IrvingSnodgrass - July 22, 1999 - 9:21 AM PT
Spuds:
Glad to see you getting some much-deserved press attention. I like the product placement in the photo (though I doubt you get much time to relax in a hammock, from what I know of your busy schedule).
I've almost finished the book, which reads with all the excitement of a good novel... a real page-turner.
I have one question. Three times in the book you mention that the Patriots have a problem with US flags with gold fringe on them. What's that all about?
305. cllrdr - July 22, 1999 - 10:59 AM PT
Great piece, Spuds. Yes, it's more of a report than a review, but I think that's what's needed for something like "The Seattle Times." It will encourage readers to go out and get the book.
Nice photo. Very Truman Capote, but *way* "butch"-er, of course.
306. spudboy - July 22, 1999 - 12:06 PM PT
Scott: Tell your Japanese-American friend to go to Montana. He is less likely to have an unpleasant encounter with a fringe dweller there than a visitor to New York is to have one with a criminal. The stereotype does have some foundation in reality -- two weeks ago, a black family moving from Arizona to Spokane had a tragic meeting with an over-the-edge white supremacist at a rest stop in Deer Lodge, Mont., during which the lunatic shot and killed the father simply because he was black -- but the incident was noteworthy for its rarity. Actually, Montana and Idaho are much safer and more pleasant places to visit than any urban area I can think of. People still leave their doors unlocked there. And I know a number of Japanese-Americans who make their homes there. Indeed, the key subject of my book on the internment camps was a man who, after the camps closed, wound up spending the rest of his life farming in Montana.
307. spudboy - July 22, 1999 - 12:08 PM PT
Irv: I'm sorry that I didn't explain the gold fringe in the book (I suspect I did at some point and that it got edited out somewhere). At any rate, the idea is this: The gold fringe indicates that a court is under "admiralty law," which means that it signifies the suspension of the Constitution and places everyone in the courtroom under the special rules of a form of martial law. Note, for instance, the explanation from the this Patriot Web site explaining the differences between sovereign citizenship and federal citizenship, which (if you scroll down quite a ways) you'll see explains the gold-fringed flag thus:
Appears to be an "American flag" but has one or more of the following:
Gold fringe along its borders (called "a badge")
Gold braided cord (tassel) hanging from pole
Ball on top of pole (last cannon ball fired)
Eagle on top of pole
Spear on top of pole
(The flag shown above is Not described in Title 4 of USC and therefore is illegal on land except for maybe (1) the President since he is in charge of Navel Forces on high seas, and (2) naval offices and yards). President Eisenhower settled the debate on the width of the fringe.
The US government is still under an official state of emergency since March 9, 1933, and possibly as far back as the Civil War
_____
... Anyway, the site recommends a "military flag" which has no fringe.
The reference to the "state of emergency" in the last paragraph, BTW, refers to various and sometimes competing theories about the alleged suspension of the Constitution. One theory posits that we have been under martial law since the Civil War. Another claims that FDR actually declared such a state in 1936. Kind of tells you the roots of some of these arguments, doesn't it?
308. spudboy - July 22, 1999 - 12:12 PM PT
cllrdr: Actually, I can't say I'm wild about the picture, since I was being blinded by the sun at the time and wasn't very comfortable. And besides, I think (as Irv suggests) it was actually the first time I'd been in the hammock all summer! Ah well.
309. ScottLoar - July 22, 1999 - 5:14 PM PT
And I had supposed the furrowed brow the sure mark of keen intellect at work.
310. alistairconnor - July 22, 1999 - 5:22 PM PT
On the subject of livestock, Scott, I just had a phone call from a client. We built them a livestock herd advertising web site. Farmers can browse (graze?) by geographical region to select a dairy herd. After complainits from farmers, the client wants to change the system in order to browse by herd size rather than region : it seems that distance is no object, i.e. the farmer thinks nothing of buyinh a herd sight unseen and transporting it 500 miles or so if it's the right size.
That just seems to epitomize the quantity-before-quality thing we are talking about.
311. IrvingSnodgrass - July 22, 1999 - 5:27 PM PT
Spuds:
What is the historical reason behind the gold fringe thing? Is it something the Patriots just dreamed up?
312. labwabbit - July 22, 1999 - 5:32 PM PT
ISnod...
How are you? What are you doing in "God's Country"?
I believe...and I may be as incorrect as the next guy, but the gold fringe according to my Dad, was to signify the union surrounded in good fortune and wealth...or something as such.
(How was vacation?)
313. AzureNW - July 22, 1999 - 5:37 PM PT
I think it's a great picture, spudboy. You look like a true Seattlite gone sunhappy in our few weeks of summer.
I'm enjoying lurking in this thread very much, although I haven't commented. I'm a little concerned with accidentally igniting one of my neighbors now that the forum is visible to the online public.
314. IrvingSnodgrass - July 22, 1999 - 6:00 PM PT
labwabbit:
"What are you doing in "God's Country"?"
Well, it appears I'm one of the few who has actually read the book.
"How was vacation?"
Check out my posts in the Travel and Language threads.
What I meant in my question to Spuds about the history is how the gold fringe came to be associated with "Admiralty Law."
315. labwabbit - July 22, 1999 - 6:05 PM PT
Irv
What book??? (haha)
'Bout your travels ...I have been lurking.
Perhaps about the "gold-fringe" relative to admiralty law; he who commands the most (gold) IS the law.
Too simplistic I would presume.
316. elliot803 - July 22, 1999 - 6:37 PM PT
joezan:
"We are, after all, the most Republican county in the country."
(Shudder!)
What's the name of your town again? Pleasantville?
317. spudboy - July 22, 1999 - 7:23 PM PT
Irv: As near as I can tell, the gold fringe item is something purely concocted by Patriots, though it may have some basis in some minor rule buried in antiquity. A lot of these "sovereign citizen" theories are constructed out of obscure Uniform Commerical Code citations that have little actual bearing in the real world or have since been rendered inoperative. (In the "common law" universe, any law ever written remains operative, it seems. Thus the Dred Scot ruling is held to remain in force for True Believers.)
318. joezan - July 22, 1999 - 7:45 PM PT
Elliot:
Pleasantville is Wheeling, WV, compared to this town.
And actually, Elliot, if you somehow found yourself in this town, you would see no overt evidence of its dark, Republican heart...no statue of Ronald Reagan in front of the courthouse, no guns-n-ammo store - not even a K-mart!
In fact, walking down the main street, you might be fooled completely into thinking it's YOUR kinda town. There's a shop devoted to the 60's (complete with a hoaky sign in the window - something about an ill wind blowing across the land, and the owners' devotion to overcoming it by re-igniting the "spirit of the 60's"); and a "Mystic Wonders" shop, which sells crystals, new-age cds and such; a surf-n-skate shop; two art galleries and a sculpture's studio; an excellent book store; a "Body Restoration" salon, with masseuse; a health food store; a blues bar and a few rock bars, and a couple of real good coffee shops. And then there are the shops along the pier...
...not to mention the best, cleanest beaches in the US, and the highest concentration of golf courses anywhere.
Yup...you wouldn't have any fun here. You'd have to constantly remind yourself that you hate the place.
319. IrvingSnodgrass - July 22, 1999 - 8:17 PM PT
Spuds:
One group which you only mention in passing in your book is the Aryan nations, which seems to have been around longer than most of the groups in the Pacific Northwest, and has contributed to the image much of the country has of the Northwest as a breeding ground for white supremacists. Why wasn't this group featured more in your book? Is it because they are less radical in their actions (if not their ideology, which seems very clearly racist)? Have they been involved in confrontations with the authorities like the other groups you discuss?
320. elliot803 - July 22, 1999 - 8:42 PM PT
Hmmm....a 60s memorabilia store, a New Age store, art galleries, a masseuse....what the hell are Republicans doing there?
321. joezan - July 22, 1999 - 8:44 PM PT
We're co-opting your gig, Elliot.
322. elliot803 - July 22, 1999 - 8:49 PM PT
Next thing you know, the NRA and the Christian Coalition will relocate their headquarters to San Francisco.
The world's gone mad.
323. spudboy - July 22, 1999 - 8:57 PM PT
Irv: The Aryan Nations gets as much treatment as I felt was appropriate in Chapter 3, the history/background chapter, because they are an important source of the Patriot movement's ideology. But they are white supremacists, which is a sector I try to distinguish from the Patriots, who do not have an overt racial orientation to their agenda. The distinction is not always an easy one to make, obviously; the Freemen, for instance, were quite up-front about being Identity believers, and in that respect they straddled the two sectors. But their gig always was the tax protest/common law thread, in which the racial agenda is fairly hidden.
324. cmboyce - July 22, 1999 - 10:13 PM PT
I regret not having discovered the merits of this thread sooner. I've just finished reading the whole thing, and I am mightily impressed. Spudboy, you deserve all the complements you have received; I'd like to add my voice to the chorus. This is a splendid discussion, filled with intellectual excitement and real-world nitty gritty, etc. and _much_ more than ably moderated.
I'll be going around to the local B&N tomorrow to get a copy.
325. spudboy - July 22, 1999 - 11:12 PM PT
CM: Thanks, and welcome. I hope you're able to pick up a copy at B&N. If not -- or if they say it's “back ordered” (which seems to be the case currently at Amazon) -- probably your most efficient bet will be to go directly to WSU Press. And don't feel obligated, of course, to wait for the book before wading in.
Speaking of links …
I noticed that the link I provided above to the sovereign citizens' site isn't working, so try this one: USA vs. U.S.
326. spudboy - July 22, 1999 - 11:38 PM PT
One last link: Here's a piece from this month's Atlantic Monthly that touches directly on some aspects of the rural-urban dichotomy we've discussed here, and is certainly a thought-provoking read: Winning the War for the West
327. AzureNW - July 23, 1999 - 10:12 PM PT
I bought your book last night, spudboy. Thanks, it's going to be difficult to resist commenting.
328. IrvingSnodgrass - July 23, 1999 - 10:22 PM PT
Azure:
Why would you want to resist commenting? I, for one, look forward to your input, especially since you are from the Northwest.
Spuds:
That "Sovereign Citizens" link is fascinating. I hope you can shed some light on how some of their specific beliefs came about. So many of their positions are so far divorced from reality, I'd be interested to know just where they made a wrong turn on the path to logical conclusions. That is, of course, assuming that there's any basis at all in reality for many of those beliefs.
The wierdest of all is that comma after the first two names. Where on earth did *that* come from?
329. AzureNW - July 23, 1999 - 11:21 PM PT
Irv, you know people almost always get angry about the way I sound when I express my true thoughts, and then I feel compelled to justify myself with real details, making them angrier. In this case, it would be details about my neighbors' private lives.
330. Greystoke - July 24, 1999 - 8:24 AM PT
spuboy
I read the article that you linked from Atlantic Monthly. I hope you are not endorsing the views of the author, because it appears to me to be nothing more than wise use propoganda.
I subscribe to Trout magazine, High Country News and AFSEEE Activist, among other publications about Western public lands issues. Many of the "facts" presented in the AM article are at odds with everything I have ever read on the subject of cattle grazing.
Examples:
"His permit fees are not a form of subsidy -- he has already paid full market value for the right to graze public lands."
"In fiscal year 1998 the Bureau of Land Management and the U.S. Forest Service together spent at least $75 million on the federal grazing program, and took in only about $20 million in grazing fees. This deficit does not mean, however, that ranchers underpay. Setting aside for the moment the questions of whether ranchers should bear the full cost of the range program and whether taxpayers benefit from it, the fact is that 90 percent of ranchers with grazing allotments have paid full value for their leases, though the money didn't go to the federal government. "
I don't quite get the author's point. If the federal government is running a $55 million deficit for the grazing program, then public land grazing is clearly a subsidy to the ranchers who use it. She goes on to explain that paying "full value" means that when the owners bought the ranch, the value of the public grazing permit was included in its value. Well, what the hell does that have to do with whether or not public grazing is a subsidy? The author is just blowing smoke.
[continued]
331. Greystoke - July 24, 1999 - 8:38 AM PT
"Furthermore, many scientists who study what happens to land where cattle graze admit that no definitive case can be made for or against livestock grazing."
Utter bullshit. Hundreds of biologists, including many who work for the Forest Service and BLM, recognize that, on balance, grazing is harmful to wildlife and fisheries. Yes, measures can be taken to mitigate the negative impacts of grazing. But these measures are costly to the rancher and many ranchers cannot afford, or simply refuse, to go to the trouble to implement such mitigation.
These two statements in the article:
"Yet environmentalists would have us believe that cattle grazing is an ecological evil on a par with clear-cut logging and open-pit mining. There is no justification for this claim. Modern livestock grazing has comparatively little environmental impact."
and
"Both ranchers and wildlife would suffer if cattle were entirely removed from the public range."
are seemingly contradicted by this statement:
"Although it is generally acknowledged that riparian zones are still suffering, until a decade or two ago no one understood their importance, and riparian recovery efforts are just beginning."
Apparently the author doesn't consider riparian damage to have a negative impact on wildlife, which is a ridiculous position. Trout fishermen like me are very concerned about the impact of grazing on trout habitat in the West, particularly the strains which are endangered species. And damage to riparian zones affects nearly all range wildlife, not just fish.
So, spudboy, please elaborate on you "take" of this article that you linked for us.
332. spudboy - July 24, 1999 - 12:55 PM PT
Irv: Almost all of the "sovereign citizen” and “common law” material is extracted from the Posse Comitatus system of beliefs. Like almost all of the Patriot beliefs (including the black helicopters and U.N. troop movements) they are based on germs of fact hyper-spun out of reality.
The Posse was created between 1964-69 by a Portland refrigerator repairman named Henry “Mike” Beach, whose “Blue Book” is considered the movement's definitive text. Beach had been a leading member of William Dudley Pelley's 1930s crypto-fascist Silver Shirts and borrowed many of Pelley's ideas liberally, sprinkling them with John Birch-style anti-communist conspiracy theories and a few notions of his own, so it's hard to pin down the precise locus of all these ideas' origins. But what Beach essentially did was pore over a bunch of archaic and usually outdated laws, declared them to be still in effect as “common law” (which is a rather bizarre and largely non-accepted application of the concept of real common law), and then devised a political system built around the concepts he constructs from all this -- focusing on the devolved notion that the sheriff of each individual county represents the supreme law of the land, the states subordinate to them, and the feds subordinate to the states.
There have been in the ensuing years an entire complex of addenda to the core of this theory, including all of the “sovereign citizen” stuff you now find on this site. And the real genius of the Freemen, in case I wasn't clear enough in the first chapter, was in making a real money-making scheme out of the whole thing, outside of suckering a bunch of True Believers into buying your video tapes. The Freemen made so much money that they *gave* their videos and books away, a rather unusual phenomenon in the Patriot universe.
333. spudboy - July 24, 1999 - 12:57 PM PT
Greystoke: Well, I posted the Atlantic piece because I thought it was interesting and certainly germane to the subject here, and I hoped to see it spark precisely this kind of discussion. However, I found it to be a far cry from “Wise Use” propaganda, with which I am intimately familiar (their ties to the Patriot movement are substantial, especially in this neck of the woods). Ron Arnold, FWIW, is someone with whom I have sparred a great deal, since the Center for the Defense of Free Enterprise is located in Bellevue, which is where I worked for six years as news editor and editorial assistant of the local paper. I wrote several pieces over the years that essentially deconstructed some of Arnold's Wise Use propaganda.
But, as you would know if you were to read the book, my perspective is fairly simple: The stereotype of the slob rancher ruining the streams with cattle is fairly overblown. The majority of ranchers are actually far better land stewards than the average citizen, especially if the land is their own. And many of them are in fact fairly active environmentally speaking. Look at groups like the Northern Plains Resource Council -- a group that was praised by High Country News, in fact, in 1997 for actually accomplishing the most of any group in the West in effecting real environmental solutions -- which represents the cooperative efforts of environmentalists and ranchers to devise common-sense solutions that work well for everyone. (The chief hero of my book, Cecil Weeding, was in fact a major player in the NPRC before he was killed.)
334. spudboy - July 24, 1999 - 12:58 PM PT
Moreover, ranchers are going to be important allies for environmentalists in dealing with what is quickly becoming the single biggest threat to environmental quality in the West: development. All these people coming from California and the East with their inflated property-value profits are snapping up ranches and large lots in the West and turning them into housing tracts. Visit the area around Bozeman or Livingston, Mont., now and you'll be shocked at how they're turning these areas into big paved suburban areas. The only people standing in the way of this trend are the ranchers trying to keep their lands in agricultural production. (Funny thing about this: This very topic is the lead article in this month's High Country News. Have you read that piece, yet, Greystoke?)
I will tell you that I *do* think people who just want all human use except recreation to halt on public lands in the West to be reprehensible (I'm reminded of the Sierra Club's recent position, which it quickly abandoned, advocating a halt to all logging on National Forest lands). You may want to come out and fish in our streams and hike in our woods, but the people in the West have to make a living here. They have always made it through resource use and extraction. Who are you to say they have no right to make a living here? Do you think this should just become a private playground for people like you? And believe me, crowds of recreationists can easily cause more damage to given areas than a herd of cows can.
335. spudboy - July 24, 1999 - 1:02 PM PT
Now, regarding the points you raise from the Atlantic piece:
-- I don't have a detailed understanding of the economics of ranching subsidies, so I'm really not prepared to debate the first point you raise. However, I'm not convinced that the author is just “blowing smoke.” I will research the question and get back to you on this.
-- The second point is not “utter bullshit.” I know many wildlife biologists who are firm trout advocates who concede that the “definitive” case hasn't been made yet, and probably never will be. The problem isn't that grazing in itself can't be proven harmful; rather, inappropriate or badly managed grazing only has been. I can tell you that the concerned ranchers who are good stewards are able to ranch with rather light impacts -- and as the article details, are actually able to provide concrete *benefits* to wildlife by providing functions on the plains formerly filled by buffalo.
-- The two statements you next point to as “seemingly contradicted” by another are not contradicted at all. Riparian damage is a *problem,* but it does not make ranching an “ecological evil on a par with clear-cut logging and open-pit mining” (a pure and simple fact: I can go on at length about the problems involved with those two particular practices). The second remark is substantiated in some detail in the article, and is only mitigated (hardly contradicted) by the facts of riparian damage.
Incidentally, I too am a trout fisherman (flies only, thank you) from a family of them, and have been active in dealing with changing ranching practices in the West for those reasons. My younger brother is a major activist in Oregon on trout-stream protection issues -- and he too believes in building alliances with ranchers that encourage sensible practices, rather than simply painting them as the bad guys. The issue is not as black-and-white as some trout advocates would have you believe.
336. spudboy - July 24, 1999 - 1:07 PM PT
Oops! Errata: "The problem *is* that grazing in and of itself can't be proven harmful ..."
337. Greystoke - July 24, 1999 - 2:51 PM PT
spudboy
"Who are you to say they have no right to make a living here?"
I neither said nor implied that.
"Do you think this should just become a private playground for people like you?"
Or that either.
My position is that ranchers who graze their cattle on public land are heavily subsidized by the taxpayer (to the tune of $55 million per year according to the AM article), and public land grazing is frequently damaging to riparian areas, and therefore harmful to fish and wildlife. It is the responsiblity of the Forest Service and BLM to make sure environmental damage does not occur. If damage does occur, then restrictions should be implemented. This includes reducing the number of cattle that can graze on the allotment, restricting where the cattle can graze, or cancelling the grazing permit altogether if the rancher is not co-operative. This is public land we are talking about, not the rancher's own private property. Do you really think that my position is unreasonable, or not based on the facts?
"Modern livestock grazing has comparatively little environmental impact."
"Although it is generally acknowledged that riparian zones are still suffering, until a decade or two ago no one understood their importance, and riparian recovery efforts are just beginning."
I repeated those two statements because I find them to be clearly contradictory, and I'm baffled by your statement that they are "not contradicted at all." If "riparian zones are still suffering" then how can grazing "have little impact"?
I agree that livestock grazing is not on par with open-pit mining as an ecological evil. Clearcut logging and grazing are comparable in that there are some circumstances where the practices are not environmentally harmful, and there are other circumstances under which environmental damage does occur.
[continued]
338. Greystoke - July 24, 1999 - 2:52 PM PT
BTW, I am glad you posted the link to the article even thought I don't agree with most of its conclusions. I'm very interested in public land issues.
And, no, I haven't read your book yet. But I intend to.
339. Greystoke - July 24, 1999 - 3:01 PM PT
Here is High Country News' index to archived grazing articles.
340. Greystoke - July 24, 1999 - 4:00 PM PT
I don't mean to beat a dead cow, but here are some more grazing links:
An editorial by the Natural Resources Defense Council.
An editorial about paying ranchers to get off public land.
Maps of Arizona and New Mexico (from Forest Guardians) where you can click on a grazing allotment and see pictures of it.
An editorial from Forest Guardians.
341. RyckNelson - July 25, 1999 - 7:52 AM PT
Good stuff, tad wordy, but it's more than skin deep.
Let's not isolate the N.W. all the time.
Minnesota had lots of trout streams and clean water ways. Now, the fertilizers of big agribusiness have polluted thousands of waterways. Recently I read only +/-5% of our waterways that once could, can still support trout. Every year here at least one feature is reporting a massive "mysterious" kill. It's pathetic to assume the public is so naivé.
By the way, do ranchers use fertilizer to enhance grazing production? I do believe they care about "their" land and that they have extreme views of its propriety. I don't hold them in esteem for their efforts. I'll explore your links for a more balanced personal view, but the ranchers have a long history, and that history is hard to forget. I'm refering to land grabbing, they probably bought most of it, but from whom? Did the natives sell it to them? Hardly!
Ok, so I'm a liberal with this history view, so. I don't clammer about it, but don't forget it, see!
Damn, spuds, I can't feel sorry for the ranchers.
The easterners and Californians influx sounds sad. I see something similar here. Sprawl is just devistating old local wildlife areas. They're now dotted with homes. Special homes, huge homes, big windows, proud! I just don't like audacious asthetics. That Wright home out west there somewhere is the best example of what I like.
Shoot, it's hard to avoid prolixity with this topic.
I'm sorry I jump around so. ;-)
342. FreetoChoose - July 25, 1999 - 11:40 AM PT
There is a discussion (albeit brief) about the gold fringe. It is on page 263, and notes that someone believes gold fringe indicates Admiralty law. (If anyone's book pages differently, it is a couple pages into the “End of the Universe” chapter.
343. FreetoChoose - July 25, 1999 - 11:46 AM PT
ScottLoar
“I have a Japanese-American friend, Nissei actually from Hawaii, 62+- years old, who intended to visit Montana or Idaho with his wife but their daughter who is a flight attendant on Aloha Airlines discouraged them by noting the ultra-nationalist crazies who abound there. In some quarters, it seems, these extremists are fairly well-known.”
How curious!! Math-challenged? Or just irrational?
I was going to post that a visit to any large city is more likely to lead to a confrontation with a crack addict, but I see someone beat me to the thought.
344. FreetoChoose - July 25, 1999 - 11:49 AM PT
uzmakk
“One more example. I bought a short-shafted shovel with a plastic handle at the top of the shaft many years ago. The plastic handle flexed. A tremendous amount of energy went into flexing that handle and not into the ground where the business end of the shovel was.
I had been fooled into purchasing an item, which looked like a shovel, felt like a shovel, but was not a shovel. Money had exchanged hands, however, and a profit was made.”
Shovels with metal or wood handles exist. They aren't hard to find. You chose to buy another (cheaper?) one. If the point of your example was to show that ignorance has a price, then you succeeded. However, I didn't get the sense that you were trying to tell us that. Can you explain what lesson you wanted us to get?
345. FreetoChoose - July 25, 1999 - 11:52 AM PT
uzmakk
“Back to the food supply. My father was a chemist and he told me that it took him a long time to learn a simple lesson that he had a hard time learning, and the lesson was this--
Given a problem one can come up with many solutions which can be rated on an absolute scale considering only how well they solve the problem.. The market, and therefore the company, is never interested in the best solution to any problem, but the solution that can make the most money.”
Normally, part of what it means to be “best” includes cost-effectiveness. You seem to imply that the “best” solution to a problem excludes cost considerations. Did I read that correctly? If so, why?
346. FreetoChoose - July 25, 1999 - 11:57 AM PT
Message #270
ScottLoar
“Can capital - free money - cause the same effect? Yes, if directed and limited to an administrative body (I do not include debt relief).”
Why would you exclude debt relief? One consequence of debt relief is to reward the profligate and the crooked relative to those who sweat to pay back loans. Lest you incorrectly infer that I was opposed to the recent world-wide debt relief, I was not. I thought it was a good decision, though I would have preferred linking it to reform of the idiotic bodies that issued the debt.
347. FreetoChoose - July 25, 1999 - 12:02 PM PT
Message #263
ChristinO
“I don't believe that only conservatives do this but the discussion arose specifically from the knee-jerk accusation that Adrianne had defamed all Conservatives and Libertarians as potential terrorists and lunatics.”
This story is growing with the retelling.
I think I was the first person to object to her comment. However, I wasn't complaining that Ad smeared *all* conservatives and libertarians. Indeed, my concern was almost the opposite. Her post referred to libertarians *in the fray*. There are, what, perhaps 6 of us? That's a fairly targeted swipe.
348. FreetoChoose - July 25, 1999 - 12:05 PM PT
Message #248 spudboy
“BTW, FTC, I think you'd be hard-pressed to make a case that global warming is beneficial.”
Oh please. The potential benefits have been discussed extensively. If you really haven't heard about, I'll find some links, but further discussion probably belongs elsewhere.
349. FreetoChoose - July 25, 1999 - 12:25 PM PT
Message #241 EricCartman1
“Are you serious? Do you really think that global warming 1) has not been significantly contributed to by man-made pollution and 2) is probably not a bad thing?”
The evidence suggests that man has not materially contributed to global warming. If it continues, it will have both detrimental and positive effects. Netting these out is complicated. Should there be interest in further discussion, we should either ask Irv for a new thread, or move to NOTD. (Arguably, “international”, but I'm guessing those folks would be chagrined about cluttering up their thread:)
350. FreetoChoose - July 25, 1999 - 12:26 PM PT
And finally, returning to the central subject:
Spudboy
Thanks for your extensive response to my question about the Weaver court date. I understand that it is a bit of a tar baby; not easy to cover in a few sentences.
I'll also emphasize that the incident is less significant to me that I had originally thought, due to a misunderstanding (on my part) of the time line. I somehow got it into my head that the shooting occurred after the Feb court date, but before the (erroneous) March date. Obviously, I am way off on that point, but I hope you can appreciate that it seemed more important under my mistaken recollection.
That said, your point in Message #246is valid: “In retrospect, though, I think the matter does merit some kind of mention, if only because it has become a point on which Weaver and his defenders have claimed some kind of vindication, and so is worth at least addressing briefly.”
Your two-sentence addition helps, but still troubles me. The statement that “the U.S. attorney and judge considered [the mistake] inconsequential” is literally correct, but glosses over the fact that the DOJ was critical of the error. While I agree that Weaver was unlikely to show up even if there had been no error, surely you appreciate the difference between things we know with a high degree of certainty, and things the government can act upon. Surely there is some way to acknowledge a clerical blunder on the part of the government, but note that the confrontation occurred long after both the original date and the erroneous date had passed.
351. FreetoChoose - July 25, 1999 - 12:30 PM PT
An excerpt from the Seattle paper jumped out at me:
“Neiwert is no alarmist. He doesn't think we're in danger of an imminent takeover by those whose Christian fundamentalist, government-hating views permeate their every action. But, he warns, we shouldn't let our guard down.”
A good summary of my position.
It is very difficult to proselytize without, unwittingly, falling into the pound-on-the-table-and-warn-that-the-world-will-end-as-we-know-it-unless-we-take-immediate-action. You done an admirable job of avoiding extremes.
352. ScottLoar - July 25, 1999 - 2:04 PM PT
re Message #343, sorry but I don't understand at all your comments.
re Message #346, it is exactly because I anticipated the argument that debt relief was a form of free capital that I pointedly excluded it. I, too, favour debt relief and reform of the bodies that incur debt - there seems no difference between us - but such discussion is far, far from the mark here.
353. IrvingSnodgrass - July 25, 1999 - 5:15 PM PT
FTC Message #342:
That is one of the three times the gold fringe thing is mentioned in the book. I was wondering about the origins of the belief. From Spuds's comments, it seems it was an invention of the soveriegn citizens followers.
FTC:
We had a Global Warming thread last year:
The Fray's Global Warming Thread
In that thread, there were links to papers presenting both sides of the issue:
Global Warming is a Reality
Global Warming is Overstated
Here are some other informative links on Global Warming:
Global Warming FAQ
Global Warming Links Page
EPA List of Global Warming Sites
354. spudboy - July 25, 1999 - 8:34 PM PT
FTC: Good points. I'll see if I can't find a way to address the points you raise in my "correction" and still keep it succinct. FWIW, I meant to add perhaps a germane point about the sequence of events: When March 20 in fact rolled around, Weaver and his family did not budge from Ruby Ridge. It's clear that even had the court date been moved forward to deal with the clerical error, he would have been nowhere near a courtroom.
And please, let's do save the global-warming debate for another day, another thread. Though I appreciate having the resource so handy.
355. spudboy - July 25, 1999 - 8:49 PM PT
Greystoke: With the advantage of retrospective, I see that my questions to you came off as more pugnacious than I intended; they were supposed to be more in the nature of rhetorical queries. But I'll stick to their essence, which is to ask: If people cannot ranch cattle on the plains, as they have done for generations, what suggestions do you have for people to make a living out here? There aren't a lot of options. They could all be tour guides and fishing outfitters, I suppose, but there are some real limits (and problems I've mentioned) associated with that route. Most Westerners aren't exactly eager to become paid handservants to a bunch of Eastern ninnies who can't even put a worm on a hook and bobber, if you know what I mean. OTOH, I completely agree that when and where damage occurs, it should be halted peremptorily.
356. spudboy - July 26, 1999 - 8:58 AM PT
Gee, it's quiet out there. _Too_ quiet.
I guess I'll continue through the book with some notes and see if they pique anybody's interest.
Chapter 1 originally was a longer article that I tried to sell through the Los Angeles Times News Syndicate via Pacific Rim News Service, for whom I was then freelancing. You can see this article in a fairly crude form at the Militia Watchdog site. It's been reshaped quite a bit since.
The incident in the cloakroom was a little hairy, personally speaking. Things were pretty tense among the law-enforcement folks. The Patriots were all saying they were going to get their militias together and come free the Freemen, so everyone was half-expecting to see a caravan of armed wingnuts come marching through the snow into Billings. And there was a fairly sizeable contingent of Patriots at the Freemen's arraignment hearings. But McNeil was simply arrested and marched off without incident.
Within a few days, we had a pretty clear picture that the "threat" was pure fantasy. The Freemen's supporters from Idaho tried to hold a mass gathering in support of the boys in Jordan later that week in Livingston. All of about seven militiamen showed up. They were surrounded by about 20 reporters. Pretty pathetic.
357. FreetoChoose - July 26, 1999 - 10:53 AM PT
Irv
I listed the page because the other two references were very cryptic; Spud thought he had made a reference to the link between gold fringe and Admiralty Law and wondered if it had been edited out. I wanted to point out that (at least some part of) his discussion did survive.
Of course, that brief reference didn't explain the linkage, and my brief internet search hasn't uncovered anything definitive. (I did note that admiralty law is specifically mentioned in the Constitution as falling under the jurisdiction of the federal courts, so this may be a hint that so-called sovereign citizens mat feel they are not under the purview of admiralty courts.)
358. pellenilsson - July 26, 1999 - 11:55 AM PT
spudboy --- Message #356
Please keep it going. I have read your book here at my small summer cottage and I found it fascinating.From here I'm not able to participate as much as I wantbut I'll be back to 'civilisation' on Saturday and then I'll read all posts.
359. spudboy - July 28, 1999 - 9:59 AM PT
Here's a news story related to our discussion:
Justice Department says agribusiness not causing low farm prices
By PHILIP BRASHER
AP Farm Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) - Low crop prices aren't being caused by agribusiness mergers such as Cargill Inc.'s planned acquisition of Continental Grain Co., says the Justice Department's antitrust chief.
"That price decline is not a product of increased concentration" in agribusiness, Assistant Attorney General Joel I. Klein told the Senate Agriculture Committee on Tuesday. "There are other factors."
Economists attribute the recent decline in crop prices to a worldwide glut of grain and economic problems in Asia and Europe that cut into their food imports. There is no significant difference in competition in the industry now than in 1996, when commodity prices peaked, Klein said.
But with the agricultural economy stuck in its worst downturn since the mid-1980s, many lawmakers have been pointing to declining competition among food processors, pesticide makers, seed companies and other agribusinesses as the culprits. For example, four meatpackers control 80 percent of the nation's beef, up from 36 percent two decades ago.
The Justice Department came under criticism this month from congressional Democrats for allowing Cargill Inc., North America's second-largest grain trader, to acquire the grain operations of Continental Grain Co. even though the companies were required to sell some of their assets.
After Tuesday's hearing, Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D., said Klein was ignoring a long-term decline in commodity prices relative to what consumers pay for food. "Power in the marketing chain gives you a greater share of the retail dollar," Conrad said.
As for the Cargill deal, Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, told Klein the forced divestiture wouldn't "mean a darn thing back on the farm."
360. spudboy - July 28, 1999 - 10:00 AM PT
The Agriculture Department estimates Cargill and Continental control 42 percent of U.S. corn exports, a third of soybeans sold overseas and at least 20 percent of wheat exports.
The Justice Department's action will ensure buyers are still available to compete for farmers' grain, Klein said. It's in farmers' interest for U.S. companies to cut their costs because they have to compete overseas, he said.
"If we don't compete efficiently in Asia, if we don't compete efficiently in Europe to sell products, that's going to hurt the family farm," Klein said.
Klein also told the panel antitrust laws generally are adequate to protect farm interests, although he thinks Congress should give Justice responsibility for approving railroad mergers.
The Surface Transportation Board, which has authority over acquisitions in the railroad industry, approved a $5.4 billion merger three years ago between the Union Pacific and Southern Pacific over the opposition of the Justice, Transportation and Agriculture departments.
361. spudboy - July 28, 1999 - 10:09 AM PT
A couple of notes...
I find the Justice Department's position on this matter to be rather disingenuous (as, I think, do the farm-state senators quoted here). No one is saying that the rise of agribusiness is the singular cause of this economic trend; there rarely is such a critter. Rather, it's an important contributing factor. The JD blames the globalization of the economy, which is in fact the big driver here. But it blithely overlooks the fact that the rise of agribusiness is one of the big engines of that globalization.
And there's no point in pretending that the effect is minimal. I think they would be hard-pressed not to find that the chief cause, for instance, of the steep decline in pork prices has to do with the shift in supply production. Instead of having a large number of farms producing a modest number of pigs each year, the paradigm has shifted to one in which we have comparatively few large farms of gigantic "pig cities," against which a family farm simply cannot hope to compete, most of all because they lack the capital that big agribusiness wields with ease, and which has become the chief tool for driving competing small farmers out of business.
As I've said previously, agribusiness has nothing on Microsoft. But it's not hard to suspect the politics of big business when trying to understand why the Justice Department has been so slow to act.
362. ScottLoar - July 28, 1999 - 3:02 PM PT
re Message #360: The figures indicate percentages tilled by those companies (most likely not) or the percentages exported by those companies inclusive of their own purchases from other US agricultural co-ops and concerns? And in such bulk exports (like oil, sand and gravel) is there not an economy of scale favouring consolidation and aggregation?
363. alistairconnor - July 28, 1999 - 6:51 PM PT
The collapse of world pigmeat prices is often ascribed to the Danes, who apparently pioneered factory pig farming. In any case, somebody would have done it.
In France, pig farming has largely died out in the interior. It is now concentrated close to major ports, as feed is brought in by shiploads, literally dirt cheap, and transporting it by road puts up the cost prohibitively. This has brought such a concentration of pig factory in one area of Brittany that it is now known locally as the Bay of Pigs. It has a characteristic odour, and the ground water is so polluted by pigshit that the piped water supply is no longer fit to drink. The concentration of nitrates and nitrites makes you ill.
364. Wombat - July 29, 1999 - 10:58 AM PT
The pig manure problem is worse in the Netherlands, much of which is below sea level.
365. AzureNW - July 29, 1999 - 4:58 PM PT
"If people cannot ranch cattle on the plains, as they have done for generations, what suggestions do you have for people to make a living out here?"
Cattle ranching is extremely destructive of the environment. The self-centered jerks who have insufficient demand for their cattle should get out of the business and find a less destructive way to make a living. If they want to stay out there on the plains, do what the Indians on the reservations out there do: do without.
366. spudboy - Aug. 1, 1999 - 10:44 PM PT
Boy, go away for a few days, and what happens? The thread just dies! Gack!
Anyway, sorry I've been out of touch the past few days, but I've had business out of town and haven't been anywhere near a computer. Looking back over the thread, I'd say that we've probably gone through the main contextual issues I wanted to address up front, and I'm now ready to go somewhat methodically through the book. I've tried to spur some discussion along these lines by going through some notes on the chapters, but they seem not to have raised any interest.
So I'm thinking it would be fun to try another approach: Arrange a time frame when I will be online, and then try to gather the other Fraygrants who've read the book or at least portions of it to talk it all over. This would include: Irv, Free To Choose, CalGal, cllrdr, pellenilsson, Adrianne, Mazaska, and anyone else I've neglected.
I'm considering doing this, say, this coming Friday morning, or perhaps Saturday morning (Pacific time), and staying on for several hours. This would give us the chance to have something resembling an actual conversation, and might spur some actual discussion of the book's contents. So far, all we've done is talk about the underlying issues.
Anyone interested?
367. spudboy - Aug. 1, 1999 - 11:04 PM PT
In the meantime, here's another underlying issue that hasn't really been addressed:
When does government criticism turn to hysterical and irresponsible paranoia? It's a delicate subject, because I've made something of a career as a government critic, but I've found so much of the stuff emanating from conservative circles these days to have long flown the coop of reality -- claims that the government is "tyrannical" or "unconstitutional" or is ceding our sovereignty to the United Nations. That sort of thing. (I won't get into libertarians and the spread of "jury nullification" ideas in those circles, because I recently joined that debate in the Fray in another thread.) Because those ideas in themselves are pretty easily deconstructed and disproven, unless the audience is comprised of True Believers. And what I find most disquieting is that they are being promoted regularly on talk radio and other similar venues, representing a new edge in hyperbole designed to drive up ratings. But to people who are susceptible to the Patriot message, it means that their views are finally receiving the cloak of mainstream respectability.
368. pellenilsson - Aug. 2, 1999 - 12:57 AM PT
spudboy
Many thanks for your book. It reveals a world of ideas I didn't know existed and didn't think could exist. I also found your description of life and nature in Idaho and Montana fascinating.
Something that strikes me is that for once it can be a disdvantage for a country to be big. One assumes that only a small fraction of the US population is susceptible to these ideas. But a small fraction of a large number is still significant. Here in Sweden with only nine million people these extremist movements do exist but because their small numbers they never gain any momentum before they crack up due to "ideological" or personal differences and re-form under new names and (partly) new agendas.
As to your idea about a gathering I will try to be present although I guess morning Pacific time must be late evening over here. For Irv it would be the middle of the night but he seems to be up and about at unlikely hours sometimes.
369. IrvingSnodgrass - Aug. 2, 1999 - 1:09 AM PT
Spuds:
"Boy, go away for a few days, and what happens? The thread just dies! Gack!"
Hey, we've all been busy, too, drawing up papers to declare ourselves "sovereign citizens."
I'll try and be around for any on-line discussion you set up (though Pelle is right about the timing for me). I think it's a good idea.
370. spudboy - Aug. 2, 1999 - 10:06 AM PT
Irv: Are evenings better for you? We could try it then, too.
371. IrvingSnodgrass - Aug. 2, 1999 - 10:22 AM PT
Spuds:
Mornings (*your* mornings) are probably better for me, but I'll go along with whatever the majority wants. And on that note, I'm off to bed (I'm 15 hours ahead of you).
372. labarjare - Aug. 3, 1999 - 8:10 PM PT
I was in Portland, Oregon recently, took the opportunity to buy Spuds' book in Powells, and e-mailed him to mention, among other things, that in their wisdom Powells had placed his book in what I would characterize as being the Northwest Travel Section. (The title is enticing in that way at first blush, I suppose.) At any rate, Spuds e-mailed back and mentioned that he was hosting a thread on the book. Having enjoyed the book immensely, I wanted to say so. So, here I am. And, with apologies in the event that I replicate other comments (I have not been able to read the prior posts, due both to the constraints of time and the fact that the Fray doesn't seem to move very quickly these days. In other words, I couldn't get it to go back more than a few posts.)
At any rate, let me get to my comments.
373. labarjare - Aug. 3, 1999 - 8:15 PM PT
I said I enjoyed the book. That is probably a misuse of the word enjoy, since it is hard to say you are enjoying something that is in its quiet, balanced way, so unnerving. I consider myself relatively well read and, as Spuds and a few others on the Fray know, probably have more access to information relating to the Patriot Movement than most. Nevertheless, I learned a lot. For instance, I had never heard of the Phineas Priests. Of a choice of many as described by Spuds, they seem to me to be the most frightening. (I indeed hope that they do not have any sort of cohesive central planning or coordination and will gladly take the difficulty of having law enforcement be able to infiltrate easily as a price to keep the PPs on a local level.)
374. labarjare - Aug. 3, 1999 - 8:22 PM PT
Unfortunately (and I am rather confident that Spuds will concur with what I mean), I think that this will remain a very important book. Seems clear that the Patriot Movement isn't going to just fade away, wishful thinking notwithstanding. I am inclined to agree with the three tier concept Spuds' talks about. No question that there are a number of hard core thinkers and implementers out there for whom one or more of the various strains of the movement are *gospel*. Armed zealots who believe that part of their mission is to destroy (read - assassinate etc.) their enemies. Hopefully, indeed, the third tier who come to the movement perhaps in part out of what I will characterize as great frustration with their lives and prospects will be capable of being dissuaded by being shown how distorted/unreal/paranoic if you like the movement's core beliefs are and how horrible their acts are.
375. IrvingSnodgrass - Aug. 3, 1999 - 8:29 PM PT
Lab!
It's great to see you around again! Your comments add a lot to this thread.
376. labarjare - Aug. 3, 1999 - 8:30 PM PT
Which brings me to the real beauty of Spuds' book. It is very easy and facile to just conclude that the Patriot Movement is nothing more than, say, a disparate group of losers the more clever and ambitious of whom prey on this third tier of joiners. Spuds calm and, if you will, balanced approach shakes you out of those assumptions.
About a third of the way through, I had begun to think that anecdotal approach Spuds was using was a bit repetitive. All the detail about this one or that one, or this incident or that one. But, then it began to dawn on me that the banality of much of what goes on in the Patriot Movement is in large measure why it is so dangerous. It is too easy to dismiss much of it as just little clusters of very disturbed (and dangerous) people.
The professor's warnings about the feather dusters are apt.
377. labarjare - Aug. 3, 1999 - 8:33 PM PT
At any rate, I just wanted to compliment Spuds on his achievement!
And, hello to all.
Now, having typed a bit, gotta run.
378. bloodnfire - Aug. 4, 1999 - 2:50 AM PT
I'll look forward to 'tuning in' on Saturday morning (8/7) around 9 am PDT and participating in a discussion of Chapter 1. I appreciate the approach. I'm just getting into the book now, David, and enjoying it very much. Congratulations on the Seattle Times article. I'm sure it encouraged many people to buy the book. How *are* sales going ?
379. spudboy - Aug. 4, 1999 - 9:53 AM PT
Bloodnfire: Thanks. Sales are fairly lukewarm, but I'm going to be doing promotional work in the next few months to hopefully get things perking. And thanks for setting a time. That's about what I had in mind. Saturday morning at 9 it is.
Labarjare: Welcome back. I'm flattered that my thread drew you out of retirement. I'm also certainly flattered by what you have to say about the book.
I actually was fairly concerned about having just the effect you describe: Loading the reader down with so much detail that you lose track of who's who and what's where. And I'm sure that some of the "sovereign citizens" material does become repetitive. But, as you say, that was kind of the point -- to make it clear that this stuff isn't merely aberrational, but is becoming rather widespread and popping up on all kinds of fronts.
While I agree, Lab, that the Phineas Priesthood by nature is somewhat self-limiting, that seems rather cold consolation to me compared to the fact that "Vigilantes of Christendom" is gradually spreading to a wider audience. It was for sale (alongside "The Protocols of the Seven Elders of Zion" and "The Turner Diaries") at the recent "Preparedness Expo" in Puyallup, WA, which was attended by about 10,000 people.
380. spudboy - Aug. 4, 1999 - 10:42 AM PT
I'm going to try to shed some light on recent academic analysis of the Patriot movement because it's fairly useful and should set things up for our Saturday discussion. In particular, I want to toss out for discussion the essay “Religious Totalism, Violence and Exemplary Dualism: Beyond the Extrinsic Model,” by Dick Anthony and Thomas Robbins (both sociologists; Anthony is from Berkeley and Robbins from Yale). It can be found in the collection, _Millennialism and Violence_ (1995), edited by Michael Barkun of Syracuse.
In this analysis, the Patriot movement (and its relatives) is described as an “exemplary dualist movement” that is a direct product of the current larger social malaise: “It has been a staple of recent American cultural analysis and criticism that the contemporary United States increasingly lacks a consensual and compelling social ethic and that in consequence, the ‘covenant' uniting the American people has become, in Robert Bellah's words, an ‘empty and broken shell.' One consequence of the lack of an integrative ethic, we have intimated above, is a diminished capacity of parents -- who are themselves wrestling with the fragmented selves that result from the lack of an integrated ethic -- to serve as persuasive role-models or identification figures for their children, and thereby to transmit a coherent set of values. In this context parents may tend to treat their children as ‘self-objects' in the sense of evaluating them in terms of tangible, purely external criteria such as their apparent social-academic-vocational ‘success' or competence. This pattern enhances the anxiety over the themes of success, competence and power on the part of children, who are more likely to develop a fragmented or polarized self composed of a grandiose, all-powerful or omnipotent self which is split off from a devalued, pathetic, failed self.
381. spudboy - Aug. 4, 1999 - 10:44 AM PT
“Social movements with distinctly dualistic worldviews provide psycho-ideological contexts which facilitate attempts to heal the split self by projecting negativity and devalued self-elements onto ideologically devalued contrast symbols. But there is another possible linkage between these kinds of movements and individuals with split selves in the throes of identity confusion. People with the whole range of personality disorders, which utilize splitting and projective identification, tend to have difficulties in establishing stable, intimate relationships.
"Splitting tends to produce volatile and unstable relationships as candidates for intimacy are alternately idealized and degraded. Thus, narcissists tend to have vocational, and more particularly, interpersonal difficulties as they obsessively focus upon status-reinforcing rewards in interpersonal relations. They have difficulty developing social bonds grounded in empathy and mutuality, and their structure of interpersonal relations tends to be unstable. Thus, individuals may be tempted to enter communal and quasi-communal social movements which combine a more structured setting for interpersonal relations with a dualistic interpersonal theme of ‘triangulation' which embodies the motif of ‘the enemy of my enemy is my friend.'
382. spudboy - Aug. 4, 1999 - 10:46 AM PT
"Such movements create a sense of mutuality by focusing attention on specific contrast groups and their values, goals and lifestyles so that this shared repudiation seems to unite the participants and provide a meaningful ‘boundary' to operationalize the identity of the group. Solidarity within the group and the convert's sense of dedication and sacrifice on behalf of group goals may enable him or her to repudiate the dissociated negative (bad, weak or failed) self and the related selfish and exploitative self which they may be aware that others might have perceived. These devalued selves can then be projected on to either scapegoats designated by the group or, more generally, non-believers whose values and behavior allegedly do not attain the exemplary purity and authenticity of that of devotees.”
383. spudboy - Aug. 4, 1999 - 10:50 AM PT
I came across this essay just a few months ago, but I'd say it pretty accurately describes the dynamic of how and why people are attracted to movements like this. And the suggestion that the movement's primary converts will be seemingly dysfunctional people is not much cause for optimism, either, for as they note at the end: “We do not necessarily view the members of exemplary dualist groups as mentally ill or deeply disturbed relative to average levels of developmental maturity in the general population. We do believe that such groups appeal to individuals with certain identity constructions and difficulties. Nevertheless some degree of splitting, projective identification and polarized identity may be ‘normal' for most people in mainstream culture.
“People with completely holistic selves with an integrated ethical orientation rather than split-off negative external conscience may be relatively unusual, particularly in periods when general meaning orientations in the culture as a whole have declined in coherence and plausibility. ... When mainstream cultural coherence declines, and anomie and identity confusion become more common, active seeking for exemplary dualist involvements is one possible solution to immediate psychic pain.”
384. bloodnfire - Aug. 6, 1999 - 5:44 PM PT
Spudboy. I hosted a thread on The Fray, once upon a time, and I know how disheartening it can be when a day or so goes by without a post. I suggested 9:00 PDT for tomorrow's discussion of chapter 1, and five minutes ago my daughter and son in law called and they are taking me and my wife deep sea fishing tomorrow, so I won't be around. Anyway, I will check back in tomorrow evening or Sunday, and see what's cooking.
Please be encouraged. As I begin to read your book it seems to me that the Patriot movement (capital 'P') does represent some very potentially dangerous mindsets, and I appreciate the education. Your book is the most comprehensive available, the article says, and I'm glad I bought it.
385. pellenilsson - Aug. 7, 1999 - 9:09 AM PT
Well, here I am at 9.08 Pacific Time, Saturday, but where is mine host?
386. spudboy - Aug. 7, 1999 - 9:12 AM PT
Bloodnfire: Thanks. I'm not too worried -- I used to see days go by without a post in the "Sound and the Fury" thread too, but it did just fine. And don't worry about not being here. I'm just trying to kind of re-start the thread, and anyone can join along at any time. The beauty of the Fray.
But since it's now 9 am PDT, I will be here for several more hours, and then checking back in again (as I always do) periodically throughout the day.
387. spudboy - Aug. 7, 1999 - 9:24 AM PT
I should mention that I was interviewed last night on KVI, the local conservative talk-show station, by a fellow named John Carlson. To my surprise, it was an enormously gratifying experience. Carlson is something of a conservative celebrity in the area -- not only is he a talk-show host and newspaper columnist (in fact, I used to edit his column at the Journal-American in Bellevue, which at the time was the first paper to carry it, and I used to chat with him when he'd call the column in), but he also is an activist leader of sorts. He organized the ballot drive for Washington's "Three Strikes and You're Out" law that has since been duplicated across the country (I voted for it) and was the driver behind Initiative 200, the state's recently passed anti-affirmative-action law (which I voted against).
At any rate, I fully expected to get kind of drilled by Carlson. Instead, I found he had actually read the book and was taken with it. We spent an hour mostly doing the interview. We did take some phone calls in which the callers asked the kind of questions I half-expected Carlson to ask. It turned out to be the perfect forum for the point I'd hoped to make with the book (and which Carlson fully got), which is that this issue crosses political boundaries. Liberals -- particularly those with a preference for big government -- need to understand that the Patriot movement is an almost natural reaction to the real-life results of trying to have a one-size-fits-all kind of bureaucracy. And conservatives need to be careful about picking up Patriot ideas and running with them, which they are frequently wont to do.
388. spudboy - Aug. 7, 1999 - 9:33 AM PT
Some of the callers, as I mentioned, helped illustrate this point vividly. One called up and said that of course people are in revolt -- we have a president who's committed treason, even killed people who get in his way. I pointed out that the "Clinton Body Count" to which he was referring actually originated with Linda Thompson of the U.S. Militia Association in 1992, and is nothing more than a litany of unproven and largely unfounded allegations. And it let me illustrate my point: I have no problem with criticism of Bill Clinton; I can find plenty to criticize about the man myself. But when you start arguing conspiracy theories and groundless accusations about the man, you're treading into Patriot beliefs. And when you do that, you're partaking of the kind of fear-mongering that is central to the movement's agenda, because it inspires fear and complete distrust of the government. The Patriots' revolutionary fervor is fed by this; remember that their agenda isn't to merely reform the government, it's a tear-it-down-and-start-over agenda; they see the only hope for the nation as a kind of burn-it-up Phoenix rebirth. I would say that is a fairly radical agenda.
389. pellenilsson - Aug. 7, 1999 - 9:34 AM PT
spudboy
I hope that others will join in because I will not be able to contribute much. The Patriot movement is so intensly *American*. I don't mean that in a derogatory sense (to America). We have these sects too. What I mean is that the Patriots seem to draw on specifically American traditions and to put the American legal system (of which I know little) to their own use.
You make a point - and the newspaper article makes a point of you making the point - that the Patriots are not oddballs and cranks but in most respects rather ordinary people like you and me. But in a central area they are not at all like us. They seeem to have given up rational and critical thought when it comes to the role of government.
One can be critical of government. One can think that government is inept and does not understand the consequences of its actions. But if one thinks that government is out to persecute certain (non-criminal) strata of society and to limit the freedom of everyone, I think one has passed some invisible line in the sand beyond which one may rightly be called an extremist, in particular if one chooses to withdraw from society rather than to try to work within the system.
390. IrvingSnodgrass - Aug. 7, 1999 - 9:39 AM PT
Spuds:
I think your point of this being an issue which crosses political boundaries is a good one. I'm glad we don't have any Patriot types here in the Fray (though if we did, this thread would be livelier).
I also think you defined the relationship between Patriot ideas and Christianity very well in your book. There's one part I wanted to quote, but I don't have your book handy at the moment. In that part (early in the book), you described how the Patriot movement is not a brand of fundamental Christianity, and its religious principles are outside of normal Christian thought. This point was underlined again and again throughout the book, through examples of the warped beliefs of the Christian Identity followers, the Phinneas Priesthood, and "Vigilantes of Christendom." I have a fear of any overzealous religion (a fear, I suppose, due to my living in an Islamic nation, and occasionally confronting fundamental Islam), and I'm glad to know that the religious principles of the Patriots are not those of Christianity.
391. spudboy - Aug. 7, 1999 - 9:41 AM PT
Pelle: Sorry I missed your note. I'm here, really. I started writing the first post at 9 am but was a bit slow getting it onto the thread.
I was intrigued by your point in Message #368 about the size of the country contributing to making this a problem. You're quite right -- the bigness of the space in the Northwest also plays a role, because it's easy enough for these radicals to just move out into the woods here and not be noticed. In fact, a large portion of the influx of newcomers into Idaho and Montana in recent years has been apocalyptic millennialists looking for a bunker when the shit hits the fan, and they are prime recruits for the Patriots. Secondarily, many of them are mildly prejudiced whites who are looking to get away from urban minorities and find such a refuge out here, where the main minority is Indian. The message of the "white homeland in the Northwest" crowd resonates pretty deeply with these folks too.
392. spudboy - Aug. 7, 1999 - 9:48 AM PT
Pelle: Actually, I think your outsider's perspective is quite valuable. Yes, the Patriot movement is specifically American, but its underlying impulses -- those of fascism -- most famously manifested themselves in your neck of the woods. I'd think you would have a lot to contribute in this regard, since I think you can bear witness to the fact that these kinds of beliefs always take root and spread not through rattle-eyed lunatics but with seemingly normal people in the ranks. Fascism isn't something that was imposed on Europeans from the outside; it arose organically and almost unnoticeably until it suddenly became genuinely potent.
393. FreeToChoose - Aug. 7, 1999 - 9:48 AM PT
IrvingSnodgrass
I agree with you.
I suspect that some of the Patriots grab onto Christian fundamentalism to tap into a circle of already organized people.
394. FreeToChoose - Aug. 7, 1999 - 9:51 AM PT
I think the Patriot attitude comes first. Still, as I mentioned earlier, I was a bit surprised to see a group that was anti-Christian, (as opposed to simply secular). It seems like that would alienate too many believers.
395. FreeToChoose - Aug. 7, 1999 - 9:54 AM PT
spudboy
Your experience on the talk show is intriguing.
At one level, one might expect that a serious conservative would have some level of sympathy with the Patriots, if we think of this movement as a an extreme form of conservatism. OTOH, a conservative with strong beliefs might see the Patriots as a caricature of conservatism, and giving it a bad name. Consequently, some mainstream conservatives might be sympathetic to those who are concerned about the excesses.
396. spudboy - Aug. 7, 1999 - 9:57 AM PT
Irv: You're right, though with some important qualifications. The Patriot movement largely considers itself Christian; it expounds at length about how the nation needs to return to Christian principles, and followers frequently refer to the movement's previous name by calling themselves Christian Patriots. I think one need go no further than the beliefs of Christian Identity, which really are at the root of the movement, to see how deep this veneer runs.
Identity employs all of the motifs and symbols and many of the ideas of fundamental Christianity. Just as with mainstream believers, it adheres rigidly to the doctrine of Biblical inerrancy and uses the text of the Scriptures to make many of its points. Indeed, it is able to point to a large number of Biblical passages to "prove" that God intended us to be racially segregated and that homosexuals should be put to death, etc. In this regard, you an see that it is twisting the Scriptures ultimately to achieve a radical sociopolitical agenda.
My point in the book is that mainstream Christianity has largely rejected these interpretations for over a millennium (though you did hear many of them crop up during the debate in the 1800s over slavery). People who are, in my opinion, genuine Christians will reject these arguments as truly anathema to the spirit of Christ.
397. FreeToChoose - Aug. 7, 1999 - 10:01 AM PT
spudboy
One of the "problems" with the book, leading to luke-warm sales (don't get your dander up, this will turn out to be a compliment) is the reasonably even-handed nature of the coverage. So who would be interested? The Patriots, while covered fairly (or more correctly, because they are covered fairly) come off as a bunch of losers. I can't imagine any Patriot encouraging another one to add it to their reading list.
Neither is this a polemic warning people to take action of the world will come to an end. So no one is running around saying "you've got to read this book, so you can be warned about this impending threat."
I congratulate you on the even-handed portrayal, but marketers like extremes.
398. spudboy - Aug. 7, 1999 - 10:02 AM PT
FTC: I think that you have pegged the talk-show host exactly right, and I can't tell you how gratifying it is to see the idea behind the book actually manifesting itself in that way. Carlson is a fairly wise conservative; he's interested in the problems of actually governing in a conservative fashion, and understands innately that claiming that the entire government is corrupt and beyond hope -- that is must be torn down to start all over -- is not exactly a good starting point for those who wish to govern in the here and now.
399. IrvingSnodgrass - Aug. 7, 1999 - 10:04 AM PT
Spuds:
Yes, I suppose my point was that although the Patriots consider themselves true Christians, mainstream Christianity considers their beliefs outside the norm. I can't imagine even the most vocal bible-thumping fundamentalist in the Fray (for example) embracing the beliefs in "Vigilantes of Christendom."
400. spudboy - Aug. 7, 1999 - 10:08 AM PT
FTC: I suspect you're right about the sales, though what I think is happening specifically is that, because I'm not ringing the alarm bells, people in the media aren't paying much attention to it. And let's face it -- most of them aren't very interested in reading about "wackos." They think books like these just give them unwarranted attention. And they certainly don't want to think about their own complicity in creating the underlying conditions that give the movement its momentum -- particularly their urban-white collar focus and refusal to pay attention to rural or working-class issues, which plays a key role in the disenfranchisement that seems to be a Patriot precondition. I'm afraid the message of the book is just too discomfiting for too many people who are in the position of being able to give it wider attention.