Why John Perry Barlow supports John Kerry

“Terrible things have happened during the last four years that should not be rewarded no matter how we feel about John Kerry. The war in Iraq alone is unforgivable. While it would be a wonderful thing to have a beacon of democracy in the Middle East, it is criminally misguided to think that we could bomb such a thing into existence. And while it has become a mandatory cliche to say that the world is safer without Saddam Hussein in charge of Iraq, I wouldn’t even say this appears true at present. ” — John Perry Barlow

The Rule of Four

This novel by Ian Caldwell and Dustin Thomason is not a gripping story but I like the characters and the way the speak.

  • A son is the promise that time makes to a man, the guarantee every father receives that whatever he holds dear will someday be considered foolish, and that the person he loves best in the world will misunderstand him. [Prologue]
  • To count a hundred million stars, at the rate of one per second, sounds like a job that no one could possisbly complete in a lifetime. In reality, it would take only three years. The key is focus, a willingness not to be distracted. [Pg 7]
  • We made a friendship out of nothing, because nothing was the the heart of what we shared. [Pg 48]
  • The generational clock ground out another revolution, and time turned friends to strangers. [Pg 71]
  • The only things people can ever know about you are the ones you let them see. [Pg 97]
  • My mind is a flock of pigeons, fluttering away. All my thoughts are shit and feathers. [Pg 130]

“A crusade for democracy is a contradiction in terms”

“Empire requires an unshakeable belief in the superiority of ones own race, religion, and civilization and an iron resolve to fight to impose that faith and civilization upon other peoples.

We are not that kind of people. Never have been. Americans, who preach the equality of all races, creeds, and cultures, are, de facto, poor imperialists. When we attempt an imperial role as in the Philippines or Iraq, we invariably fall into squabbling over whether a republic should be imposing its ideology on another nation. A crusade for democracy is a contradiction in terms.

While it would be nice if Brazil, Bangladesh, and Burundi all embraced democracy, why should we fight them if they dont, and why should our soldiers die to restore democracy should they lose it? Why is that our problem, if they are not threatening us?

If attacked, Americans fight ferociously. Unwise nations discover that. Threatened, as in the Cold War, we will persevere. But if our vital interests are not threatened, or our honor is not impugned, most of us are for staying out of wars.”

— Pat Buchanan [from The American Conservative]

We the Media

“The Internet is the most important medium since the printing press. It subsumes all that has come before and is, in the most fundamental way, transformative. When anyone can be a writer, in the largest sense and for a global audience, many of us will be. The Net is overturning so many of the things we’ve assumed about media and business models that we can scarcely keep up with the changes; it’s difficult to maintain perspective amid the shift from a top-down hierarchy to something vastly more democratic and, yes, messy. But we have to try, and nowhere is that more essential than in that oldest form of information: the news. We will be blessed with new kinds of perspective in this emergent system, and we will learn how to make it work for everyone.

Blogs and other modern media are feedback systems. They work in something close to real time and capture — in the best sense of the word– the multitude of ideas and realities each of us can offer. On the Internet, we are defined by what we know and share. Now, for the first time in history, the feedback system can be global and nearly instantaneous.”  – Dan Gillmor’s We the Media (pg 236)

Who should read this book? Newsmakers, the reporters that cover them and anyone that reads, watches or listens to those reports.

National Association of Broadcasters

The cover story (by Scott Woolley) in the September issue of Forbes is really more about the National Association of Broadcasters than XM Radio.

“For decades the radio industry has crushed incipient competitors by wielding raw political muscle and arguments that are at once apocalyptic and apocryphal. Radio station owners, who formed the National Association of Broadcasters in 1923, have won laws and regulations that have banned, crippled or massively delayed every major new competitive technology since the first threat emerged in 1934: FM radio.”

What would radio be like if broadcasters put this much energy into doing better radio?