Politics

Michael Moore has released this very cool Teacher's Guide for using Bowling for Columbine in class. There are TONS of ideas for activities in the guide. I stumbled onto the guide while daydreaming about Moore (last night I watched Bowling for Columbine for the third time, which revived the little crush I've had on him for some time).

Edited to add: Cross-posted at Kairosnews, where there are some interesting comments. I feel compelled to say that I am not using Bowling for Columbine in my class (and never have), and am not, then, using Moore's guide. As I said on Kairosnews, I think the activities are useful because one can re-tool them and use them as heuristics for discussing just about any film or other media.

Sometimes I wonder if critical thinking is the downfall of the political left. I like critical thought and all, but lefties are splintered (into Green Party, Democrats, various independents) as a result of all this disagreement on fine points, so there isn't the unity you have with the right-wing and right-leaning support of the Republican Party. Obviously, I don't know a lot about politics, but this is the impression I get. I am, however, cautiously optimistic when it comes to Howard Dean. When I look at all the stuff on his site and Blog for America, it's just so dang upbeat, and now I'm hopeful. Could he become our next president? Could Carol Moseley Braun? Now that would make me ecstatic...

Observe:

What we have here is a New Testament in secular packaging, which is fine, right? Well, except for the fact that they've only published a Bible like this for young women, not young men, and young white women at that--the slice of the population that most needs to be controlled and disciplined, they'd have us believe. Anyway. Look what they're doing with what many people, including Christian feminists, insist is egalitarian theology:

Among its declarations: "Revolve girls don't call guys," and "Revolve girls are not argumentative."

One entry in an advice column called Blab says, "God made guys to be the leaders. That means they lead in relationships. They tell you they like you first, not vice versa.

From the faith section of the Philadelphia Inquirer. Emphasis in original.

AKMA, I'm wondering if you've seen this and what you think. My guess is that you'd dismiss this as a fundamentalist interpretation of the New Testament. Am I right? What do postmodernist theologians think of this kind of stuff? (Oh, by the way, nice post.)

I just found and added to the blogroll Charles W. Johnson. He describes his blog as:

Pretentious culture-trawling, heavy-handed political growling, nerd-boy technology, philosophic essays, and general geekery from a bisexual radical feminist geeky white computer nerd boy in Alabama!

Isn't it obvious why I think he is fabulous? He's 21 years old and a senior at Auburn majoring in philosophy and computer science. See, this is what I try to tell people--not all people from the south are racist, sexist, and otherwise bigoted. Lots of us grew up seething in the face of the ignorant rantings we heard all the time, did some reading and, if we were lucky, had some good teachers, and turned out like Charles. Becky might back me up on this.

Send it to BUST! Deadline is imminent (September 1), but they only want 2,500 words or fewer.

Declare your independence in BUST's upcoming "Independence" issue !
Friday, August 8, 2003 What does independence mean to you? Is it leaving the nest? Leaving a relationship? Leaving an addiction behind? Is independence overrated? If you

Chris Hables Gray has published a Cyborg Bill of Rights. I see that it was last updated in 1997, so it might be played out by now, but I'm sorry; I have to weigh in on this. It's one of the most right-wing (in the libertarian sense) things I've ever read! The word "individual" appears in it 16 times; the individual is privileged above all other things. This flies in the face of Haraway's strong critique of Western individualism--her use of the cyborg as metaphor for the fact that nothing is really individual anymore. We're all amalgams, and the fact that I'm part machine and part human, thanks to my prosthetic hammer, anvil, and stirrup, contact lenses, etc. can be analogized to community. Western individualism, Haraway argues, has interfered with unity among people, community. It seems to me that this Bill of Rights, which invokes the individual so frequently and earnestly, shouldn't invoke the cyborg at all. Consider this quotation:

Freedom of Consciousness. The consciousness of the citizen shall be protected by the First, Fourth, and Eighth Amendments. Unreasonable search and seizure in this, the most sacred and private part of an individual citizen, shall be absolutely prohibited. Individuals shall retain all rights to modify their consciousness through psychopharmological, medical, genetic, spiritual and other practices in so far as they do not threaten the fundamental rights of other individuals and citizens and if they do so at their own risk and expense.

What are the implications of this for community? If I want to take 100 hits of acid, that's my individual prerogative, right? MY self, my modified consciousness. That would surely kill me and affect my community, but so what?

Sheesh.

Link courtesy of Dr. B.

You just blew my mind.