Obsidian Wings

Alkahest

by liberal japonicus

Here

Otherwise, an open thread.

same as it ever was

by russell

a bit of local history.  local to me, at least - the events described here all occurred within a mile or two of where I live.  

plus ca change.  I wonder if the bit about the local militia stand-off at the bridge is a peek at our future.

 

Credo!

by liberal japonicus

Former pope Benedict admits making false claim to child sexual abuse inquiry

“Tell me, Martin,” he said. “Weren’t some of the popes—of course, not our present man, or his predecessor, but some of the old popes—not exactly ... you know ... up to the knocker?”

There was a silence. Mr Cunningham said:

“O, of course, there were some bad lots.... But the astonishing thing is this. Not one of them, not the biggest drunkard, not the most ... out-and-out ruffian, not one of them ever preached ex cathedra a word of false doctrine. Now isn’t that an astonishing thing?”

“That is,” said Mr Kernan.

“Yes, because when the Pope speaks ex cathedra,” Mr Fogarty explained, “he is infallible.”

“Yes,” said Mr Cunningham.

“O, I know about the infallibility of the Pope. I remember I was younger then.... Or was it that——?”

Mr Fogarty interrupted. He took up the bottle and helped the others to a little more. Mr M’Coy, seeing that there was not enough to go round, pleaded that he had not finished his first measure. The others accepted under protest. The light music of whisky falling into glasses made an agreeable interlude.

“What’s that you were saying, Tom?” asked Mr M’Coy.

“Papal infallibility,” said Mr Cunningham, “that was the greatest scene in the whole history of the Church.”

“How was that, Martin?” asked Mr Power.

Mr Cunningham held up two thick fingers.

“In the sacred college, you know, of cardinals and archbishops and bishops there were two men who held out against it while the others were all for it. The whole conclave except these two was unanimous. No! They wouldn’t have it!”

“Ha!” said Mr M’Coy.

“And they were a German cardinal by the name of Dolling ... or Dowling ... or——”

“Dowling was no German, and that’s a sure five,” said Mr Power, laughing.

“Well, this great German cardinal, whatever his name was, was one; and the other was John MacHale.”

“What?” cried Mr Kernan. “Is it John of Tuam?”

“Are you sure of that now?” asked Mr Fogarty dubiously. “I thought it was some Italian or American.”

“John of Tuam,” repeated Mr Cunningham, “was the man.”

He drank and the other gentlemen followed his lead. Then he resumed:

“There they were at it, all the cardinals and bishops and archbishops from all the ends of the earth and these two fighting dog and devil until at last the Pope himself stood up and declared infallibility a dogma of the Church ex cathedra. On the very moment John MacHale, who had been arguing and arguing against it, stood up and shouted out with the voice of a lion: ‘Credo!’”

“I believe!” said Mr Fogarty.

“Credo!” said Mr Cunningham. “That showed the faith he had. He submitted the moment the Pope spoke.”

“And what about Dowling?” asked Mr M’Coy.

“The German cardinal wouldn’t submit. He left the church.”

Mr Cunningham’s words had built up the vast image of the church in the minds of his hearers. His deep raucous voice had thrilled them as it uttered the word of belief and submission. When Mrs Kernan came into the room drying her hands she came into a solemn company. She did not disturb the silence, but leaned over the rail at the foot of the bed.

Dubliners, by James Joyce

A Ukraine open thread

by liberal japonicus

This just popped up
Common Security Approaches to Resolve the Ukraine and European Crises

and I thought it would provide an opportunity for folks to discuss this.

Of course, it should come as no surprise that the Republicans seek to make hay out of this
Dems torpedo Cruz’s bid to sanction Russian pipeline

Anyway, discuss.

This be the thread...

by liberal japonicus

Just to get things started:

This be the verse

Have at it.

Are we screwed yet? Volume 3,473

by liberal japonicus

Japan’s Shift to the Right: Computational Propaganda, Abe Shinzō’s LDP, and Internet Right-Wingers (Netto Uyo)

Abstract: In recent years, academic research and investigative reports have brought to light several cases of computational propaganda (i.e. orchestrated attempts to manipulate public opinion or the outcome of elections via social media), as well as proof that filter algorithms amplify right-wing conservative content on Japanese social media. Piecing together the scattered pieces of a puzzle, this article summarizes recent findings from various disciplines and provides an overview of the mechanisms and potential scope of computational propaganda in politics. Although there is no conclusive evidence of who is behind this anonymous activity, an analysis of these findings demonstrates increasing circumstantial evidence that certain factions of the LDP are actively using computational propaganda, either by commissioning external contractors or through its online support group, J-NSC, thereby condoning and appealing to anonymous Internet right-wingers (netto uyo). The concluding discussion assesses the effects and consequences of computational propaganda on the political sphere in contemporary Japan.

My feeling is that if this is going on in Japan, I think it must be much greater in the US.

A vignette

by liberal japonicus

This post has been rattling around in my mind and the recent discussion has me try and put this up, though it is unfinished. First, a name that I knew, sort of a second order relationship (I know several people who knew him) popped up in this headline

What Joe Manchin told Steve Clemons at dinner

What I didn't realize was that Steve Clemons was "Editor At Large of The Hill, D.C. operator and Joe Manchin’s confidant.". I want to note a few things about him, but first, to summarize the article, it tells how Clemons (who is gay) ended up working with Manchin over the repeal of Don't ask, don't tell. Clemons was the one who suggested that Manchin go on with Rachel Maddow.

Fastforward to the more immediate present,

Ryan: I heard that last night [the night of January 12] you had an interesting dinner.

Steve: Yeah.

Ryan: So, who did you have dinner with last night, Steve?

Steve: The first dinner or the second dinner?

Ryan: Well, I don't know. Let's hear it.

Steve: No, I mean, like sorry, I gotta be careful, but I had dinner with Joe Manchin and with Randi Weingarten at Cafe Milano. And I think, Randi...

Ryan: This is on the eve of when Joe Biden is going up to the Senate to speak at the caucus lunch and basically try and pressure [Senators] Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema to change their views on the filibuster and support voting rights. So this is on the eve... You're having dinner with Joe Manchin on the eve of one of the most important days of his Senate career.

Steve: I can talk about what I think the players are doing [unintelligible]. I'd rather not talk just about the conversation at the dinner.

Ryan: Well, I think it's been reported that Randi was trying. Randi helped him with the compromise voting rights legislation.

Steve: What Randi did, she said, look, you had a problem... So much of Washington, I just wanna be honest with people, is sometimes... It's not a function of corruption or special interests. It's sometimes just a function of lack of imagination, or people are driven by inertia. I kind of see a role that fits with my role as an opinion journalist. I'm not a reporting journalist, right? So that's a different, big difference, as somebody who has views and attitudes. But I try to be responsible and transparent about it in responsible ways. I also see my role as one of opening the aperture of different people who are in conflict or who are not there. Opening aperture so they can see possibilities they might not have otherwise thought they had. I look at that as a legitimate and actually a needed part of my role in Washington, right?
I think the point is that Joe Manchin, I knew, believed that S.R. 1 was too packed with things that were unrelated to the openness or the constraints on voting, and also that it was packed with issues that were more about social reform than they were about dealing with the voting questions. And he was dead, dead set against S.R. 1. What he was for was the John Lewis Voting Rights Act. But anyone that looked at the John Lewis Voting Rights Act, which is commendable and important, knows it does not go far enough to address many of the problems in voting that we had seen recently, particularly with voter suppression and various kinds of things. I think that his take was we needed to modify this. I humbly suggested "Well what you're really doing is talking about John Lewis Plus." Randi suggested talking to Stacey Abrams, and he, in a Joe Manchin way — because he's tried to be very chivalrous, very magnanimous — [said] "Yeah, sure. Sure, we'll do that." But there was a long time before that call with Stacey actually happened. They had multiple calls, and then he and Stacey really worked on putting together a voting rights outline of things that laid out some things, like voter ID that were uncomfortable for the Democrats but were potential pathways for Republican support. But they kind of cobbled it, something, together. Barack Obama and other people came along and applauded it. Even Joe Biden says "I applaud it." So they came up with something.

Now, I have not followed the voting legislation closely, so perhaps some folks can weigh in with more details about Manchin and 'John Lewis Plus". But I want to talk about Clemons. His wikipedia page, is a bit short on details but as I understand it, he was a protege of Chalmers Johnson. The wikipedia page emphasizes his journey from a 'cold war warrior' to a critic of American imperialism, but "As a public intellectual, he first led the "Japan revisionists" who critiqued American neoliberal economics with Japan as a model, and their arguments faded from view as the Japanese economy stagnated in the mid-1990s and later." I suppose that is one way to look at it, but being in Japan, he was someone who raised a lot of trenchant criticisms about the Japanese system. Johnson was placed in a box called 'revisionists' after his publication of MITI and the Japanese Miracle: The Growth of Industrial Policy, 1925-1975. While it is really difficult to give a precis of the arguments, the reason I know Clemons name is in that regard.

As Japan became irrelevant, Clemons decamped to Washington, working at the Atlantic and is now Editor at Large for The Hill. My impression of The Hill is that in its click-baity approach to politics, it ends up in a right leaning space such that I never click on any link from them.

In looking for more background on Clemons, trying to understand why he would want to be 'Joe Manchin's confident', I came across this interview in the Washington Blade, a publication which says that it is "The oldest LGBTQ newspaper in the U.S. covering the latest gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender news in Washington, DC and around the world." The interview has this line

If your life were a book, what would the title be?
“America’s Gay Machiavelli”

There's a lot of ways to take that, and my take is going to wrapped up with the fact that I'm in Japan, wondering if I should have decamped. Or been more of a go-getter. I didn't have Clemons' goals of 'Improving the direction of U.S. foreign policy — getting Israel/Palestine resolved, ending the Afghanistan war, getting Iran on a non-nuclear course, normalizing relations with Cuba, etc." but if I have to be honest, part of my disgust with that line is possibly fueled by resentment. So, as it always is, it is more about me than him. Still, I wonder how a gay man who pats himself on the back about getting Manchin to move on DADT feels as 'Manchin's confidant' in the current political situation, especially after reading this in the first piece.

Ryan: This is on the eve of when Joe Biden is going up to the Senate to speak at the caucus lunch and basically try and pressure [Senators] Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema to change their views on the filibuster and support voting rights. So this is on the eve... You're having dinner with Joe Manchin on the eve of one of the most important days of his Senate career.

Steve: I can talk about what I think the players are doing [unintelligible]. I'd rather not talk just about the conversation at the dinner.

This doesn't mean that I think every discussion should be on the record. But I imagine that there is a tricky balancing act and even if he wants to call out Manchin, he can't. Which to me explains a lot of our problems. At any rate, discuss.

medical news

by liberal japonicus

My mom, who passed away in 2007 from melanoma, was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis in the 80's, so I found this article quite interesting

https://arstechnica.com/science/2022/01/a-very-common-virus-may-be-the-trigger-for-multiple-sclerosis/

The fact that they screened for over 200 viruses makes the conclusion much stronger. Pity we live in a time when a big chunk of the population now considers drinking one's own urine to be an appropriate defense.