(Edited to include additional statistic.)
I know I've been absent here the past few days, and it shouldn't surprise you to note that I've been glued to Ferguson. If you follow me on Facebook or Twitter, you'd see me rather active on those fronts as events have developed, leading up to today's deployment of the National Guard.
I'm not really sure what factoid you want me to throw out here that lays the situation out barer than it already is, but hey, let's just start and see if we find one.
*Michael Brown, according to an autopsy requisitioned by his family, was shot six times, resulting in his death. In 2013, the entire combined police force of England and Wales fired their guns three times (clarification: on three occasions, not necessarily firing only three bullets), killing none. In Iceland, police have killed one person in the entire history of their country.
*Back in 2001, when examining cities with populations of at least 10,000 people, Ferguson was one of only two cities in America with a majority black population and no blacks on the city council. The other was Riverdale, Georgia. Since then, Riverdale has converted to an all-black council. Ferguson has since gone to one out of six, representing a city that has risen to two-thirds black.
*The city of Ferguson has hired a public-relations firm. The firm is 100% staffed by whites.
*In 2012, at least 410 people were killed by American police action, but because reporting that is somehow a voluntary thing, the exact number is unknown but probably ranges around 1,000. Meanwhile in 2012, 543 people were killed by anyone in the entire nation of Canada.
*EDIT: In 2013, the Ferguson Municipal Court issued 24,352 warrants, which translates to three warrants per household.
*In 2012, 15.0 police officers per 100,000 were killed on the job, according to the Department of Labor Statistics. 105 died in total, with 51 of them- 48.6%- dying as a result of "violence and other injuries by persons or animals". 48 died in "transportation incidents" (think traffic accidents). Four died from slips, trips and falls, and one died as the result of exposure to harmful substances. So if you're actually looking at the violence-at-the-hands-of-others part, you'd be looking at more like 7.3 deaths per 100,000.
Using the 15.0 number, you might compare it to the death rate of roofers (42.2); 'refuse and recyclable material collectors' (aka garbagemen) (32.3); farmers, ranchers and other agricultural managers (22.8); taxi drivers and chauffeurs (16.2); landscaping services (15.0); and grounds maintenance workers (14.2).
The overall number for all self-employed workers is 12.8.
Going by the 7.3 number, shift your attention to electricians (8.9); 'painters, construction and maintenance' (8.0); 'nonmetallic mineral product manufacturing' (7.9); newspaper publishers (7.5); gasoline station workers (6.8); 'pipelayers, plumbers, pipefitters and steamfitters' (6.6); and 'laborers and freight, stock and material movers, hand' (6.5).
*Number of times Amnesty International has deployed a human rights team in the United States prior to Ferguson: zero.
This is ostensibly about Michael Brown, but the matter of Michael Brown is no longer strictly necessary to hold the cause of Ferguson together. Even if it came out that he were really some tweaked-out thug beating the stuffing out of 18 people before he was taken down by Darren Wilson following a long struggle, that no longer matters. Too much more has happened since then that justifies its own outrage, independent of the Michael Brown matter. It didn't justify six gunshot wounds. It didn't justify tear gas, or sound cannons, or flashbang grenades, or armored vehicles, or riot gear, or curfews, and it especially did not justify the National Guard.
President Obama just spoke, and among his statements, he noted that he's going to start looking at how much of the resources allocated to local police forces are actually needed by them.
Back in April, Dodge County, Wisconsin, the county in which I live, got an armored vehicle. I would very much prefer for that not to be in Dodge County right now.
Monday, August 18, 2014
Friday, August 15, 2014
Ferguson, Let's TED Talk
I'm not really sure how I want to respond to the events in Ferguson, Missouri over the past week or so. At least, I don't know how to respond that hasn't been said a thousand other places. That's a reason I try to stay away from major headlines; someone else has probably already said what I want to say better than how I plan to say it. And aside from that, it is a rapidly and continuously changing situation, often wildly. It has been a matter of police acting with apparent impunity; of race relations; of police brutality; of police militarization; of why the police have tools beyond those given to actual soldiers in actual warzones; of the wisdom of giving authorities tools beyond that which they need; of the freedoms of speech, press, peaceable assembly and redress of grievances; of the foolishness of escalation compared with de-escalation; of the utility of social media; of the chain of command; of just how much a policeman's word can be trusted when everyone is telling the same story but them; of the fact that people in the Gaza Strip felt the need to instruct people in Missouri on how to protect themselves from tear gas; of the shame and fear felt by so many that horrors such as those witnessed could occur in a country where they were raised to believe things like that did not happen, and that if it happened in Ferguson, could it happen to them?
I'm probably missing a couple. And it will take on more dimensions as we go.
But the all-encompassing matter has been one of power. The people that have it, the power that they are allowed, and what they do with that power towards- perhaps 'to' is the better word- the people that do not have it. And so I think the following TED talk is an apt one to listen to. It's by Eric Liu, who gave his talk last September in New York.
Many of us tune out of politics right now because we don't think those in power listen anyway. We don't think our vote is going to matter, or that it is even going to be counted, or that it will be listened to even if it is. We don't think those in power are doing anything with our concerns whatsoever. Perhaps these things are even true. Some of us envision an endless and hopeless dystopia perpetually around the corner, or that we are inexorably, unstoppably on our way towards one. We may envision that every bad thing that happens in the word is 'the new normal' and that everyone will do this latest horrible thing to everyone forever and that there is no way to ever resist. So people don't vote. People try to imagine that politics and power will just forget them if they don't engage.
The problem with that is that eventually, something like Ferguson happens. If you do not engage power, eventually it may engage you. Eventually, it may engage you to the point where you are forced into basic fight-or-flight. You may be rendered so utterly disenfranchised that the only way you have left to influence the process is with physical action, and you will have to simply hope someone else out there, someone who has more power than you, is able to help you, lest you be crushed. Lest power lob tear gas into your front lawn and allow it to seep through the walls of your home while you are inside it minding your own business or fearful of acting, thinking that power will just forget about you, and thinking it in vain.
There's an election in November. Maybe your vote won't be the one that swings the result. Maybe the winners won't be the ones you want, and maybe they'll just spend the next two years yelling at each other again. But there's a much higher chance that it will swing the result when you vote in the state and local elections, the ones that most directly exert power over your life. The ones that allocate budgets for things like the police and that determine how many toys they have access to. And even if it doesn't, you have the power to go inform your family, friends and acquaintances of who is being considered to be given power, the nature of that power, and what they may do with it. You have the power to petition, to donate your money and your time, to get in the field and take action to make things better. And if all else fails, you have the power to sound the alarm in whatever other social fashion you have available, alerting and perhaps recruiting those further afield to your cause, as the people of Ferguson have so ably demonstrated.
Your voice and your body are power, even if you have, or effectively have, no other formal power left. If you fail to exert them, you are as good as powerless.
I'm probably missing a couple. And it will take on more dimensions as we go.
But the all-encompassing matter has been one of power. The people that have it, the power that they are allowed, and what they do with that power towards- perhaps 'to' is the better word- the people that do not have it. And so I think the following TED talk is an apt one to listen to. It's by Eric Liu, who gave his talk last September in New York.
Many of us tune out of politics right now because we don't think those in power listen anyway. We don't think our vote is going to matter, or that it is even going to be counted, or that it will be listened to even if it is. We don't think those in power are doing anything with our concerns whatsoever. Perhaps these things are even true. Some of us envision an endless and hopeless dystopia perpetually around the corner, or that we are inexorably, unstoppably on our way towards one. We may envision that every bad thing that happens in the word is 'the new normal' and that everyone will do this latest horrible thing to everyone forever and that there is no way to ever resist. So people don't vote. People try to imagine that politics and power will just forget them if they don't engage.
The problem with that is that eventually, something like Ferguson happens. If you do not engage power, eventually it may engage you. Eventually, it may engage you to the point where you are forced into basic fight-or-flight. You may be rendered so utterly disenfranchised that the only way you have left to influence the process is with physical action, and you will have to simply hope someone else out there, someone who has more power than you, is able to help you, lest you be crushed. Lest power lob tear gas into your front lawn and allow it to seep through the walls of your home while you are inside it minding your own business or fearful of acting, thinking that power will just forget about you, and thinking it in vain.
There's an election in November. Maybe your vote won't be the one that swings the result. Maybe the winners won't be the ones you want, and maybe they'll just spend the next two years yelling at each other again. But there's a much higher chance that it will swing the result when you vote in the state and local elections, the ones that most directly exert power over your life. The ones that allocate budgets for things like the police and that determine how many toys they have access to. And even if it doesn't, you have the power to go inform your family, friends and acquaintances of who is being considered to be given power, the nature of that power, and what they may do with it. You have the power to petition, to donate your money and your time, to get in the field and take action to make things better. And if all else fails, you have the power to sound the alarm in whatever other social fashion you have available, alerting and perhaps recruiting those further afield to your cause, as the people of Ferguson have so ably demonstrated.
Your voice and your body are power, even if you have, or effectively have, no other formal power left. If you fail to exert them, you are as good as powerless.
Wednesday, August 13, 2014
Random News Generator- Northern Ireland
On September 18, Scotland will be holding a referendum on independence. As of right now, while there is a sizable contingent favoring it, there has yet to be a poll from any source showing the independence group in the lead. Roughly half of the electorate, maybe more, maybe less, is currently set to vote no, with the yeses ranging somewhere in the 35% range. And the numbers haven't really moved much. So, just to give you an idea of the odds here. Maybe there's still something that could push Scotland into independence territory over the next month, but I wouldn't think it likely.
That having been said, the other components of the British Isles are watching with great interest, just in case. Wales and Northern Ireland have their fair share of secessionists as well, and in the event that Scotland does declare independence, they're both very likely to launch campaigns of their own. In the event of Northern Ireland, such a campaign would involve Northern Ireland shifting over to join Regular Ireland. I believe you recall The Troubles, the period ranging from the 1960's up until 1998 when Ireland and Northern Ireland were constantly and violently at odds for both nationalistic and religious reasons.
But such a bid, according to polls, would go down in flames by spectacular margins if it were held right now. And there is plenty of the Northern Irish populace that dreads the unrest that might result from such a referendum's mere existence. Whatever Scotland does, there's no way Northern Ireland follows them out the door. So absent that, everyone is considering just what Scottish independence would mean to them: the ease or difficulty in opening up separate trade agreements (which they already have some experience with given Ireland's presence); the matter of subsidies from England to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland that would be altered by Scotland's absence; whether business opportunities would favor a newly-independent Scotland that might otherwise have opted for Northern Ireland. And there's the question of how much British Parliament would include Wales and Northern Ireland if they felt they were at risk of leaving as well.
But of course, all this only applies if Scotland votes that way. Or if they vote no, but the percentages are close enough to where the supporters are galvanized to try again, which is also being watched. There is no provision for a second attempt, but if the yeses happen to get into the mid-40's or something, they're probably going to push for a second vote, putting the entire UK on alert all over again. We'll have to wait and see what the number is.
That having been said, the other components of the British Isles are watching with great interest, just in case. Wales and Northern Ireland have their fair share of secessionists as well, and in the event that Scotland does declare independence, they're both very likely to launch campaigns of their own. In the event of Northern Ireland, such a campaign would involve Northern Ireland shifting over to join Regular Ireland. I believe you recall The Troubles, the period ranging from the 1960's up until 1998 when Ireland and Northern Ireland were constantly and violently at odds for both nationalistic and religious reasons.
But such a bid, according to polls, would go down in flames by spectacular margins if it were held right now. And there is plenty of the Northern Irish populace that dreads the unrest that might result from such a referendum's mere existence. Whatever Scotland does, there's no way Northern Ireland follows them out the door. So absent that, everyone is considering just what Scottish independence would mean to them: the ease or difficulty in opening up separate trade agreements (which they already have some experience with given Ireland's presence); the matter of subsidies from England to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland that would be altered by Scotland's absence; whether business opportunities would favor a newly-independent Scotland that might otherwise have opted for Northern Ireland. And there's the question of how much British Parliament would include Wales and Northern Ireland if they felt they were at risk of leaving as well.
But of course, all this only applies if Scotland votes that way. Or if they vote no, but the percentages are close enough to where the supporters are galvanized to try again, which is also being watched. There is no provision for a second attempt, but if the yeses happen to get into the mid-40's or something, they're probably going to push for a second vote, putting the entire UK on alert all over again. We'll have to wait and see what the number is.
Tuesday, August 12, 2014
Go Vote Today
It's primary day in Wisconsin (and Minnesota and Connecticut). You know what that means if you're a regular visitor. No content, just a message telling you to get off your butt and vote. Go. Move. Now.
Monday, August 11, 2014
Test-Tube Penguin
We have a test-tube penguin. Test-tube penguin, everybody. First test-tube penguin in the world, courtesy of Sea World. Everybody step up and see the test-tube penguin. Low low rates for large groups.
Sunday, August 10, 2014
Imagine If They Chugged A Red Bull
I presume that, at some point, you've participated in the ongoing debate about some energy crisis or other. It would, of course, be about running out of a nonrenewable resource, usually coal or oil.
If you live in Australia, this debate looks far different than most countries' debates. Australians have been hitting the renewable energy market with such utter vigor- as of June, we're talking 3.5 gigawatts of solar power alone, mostly since 2010- that they're actually reporting an oversupply of energy, such that if they don't install one single thing that generates energy for the next decade, they'd still be fine. In South Australia- the one with Adelaide in it- their wind energy alone is sufficient to supply 43% of the state's needs. (To compare, the US Department of Energy has a website titled "20% Wind Energy By 2030", which represents a goal regarded by them as optimistic.)
So that's pretty great, actually... on the face of it. Economics, meanwhile, are proving to be a bit of an issue, as they haven't quite caught up to the reality on the ground. You have coal plants losing money or facing closure save for government subsidies, you have large electrical companies lobbying the Australian government to ease up on infrastructural goals- or even cancel them- because the glut of energy means they can't get as much money supplying it and grid usage is going down besides, and consumers are dually complaining that they're paying too much for something that is at an enormous surplus, and that the price is somehow still going up, which to them makes absolutely zero sense.
The ultimate goal, of course, is to get completely onto renewable energy, whatever intermediate targets you set for yourself along the way. You assure you don't run out, and as a bonus, you're not spewing carbon into the atmosphere at utterly untenable levels. Sometimes that, regrettably, requires breaking the occasional economic egg. If it didn't, we'd be a whole hell of a lot further along the path than we are now. This is the part that requires breaking the egg. If you're really showing commitment to the cause, that subsidized coal plant there just for the sake of jobs is going to have to go; you can do whatever's reasonably possible to retrain the employees. The electrical company is going to have to be told to take it on the chin, since as grid usage is going down, their services are needed less.
Besides, the surplus, which is unprecedented, may not be a thing that sticks around. We do keep using energy, after all. You don't want to give yourself a surplus situation and then ease up so much that you're back to a deficit before you know it. That would be the act of a fool.
But let's see how Australia acts.
If you live in Australia, this debate looks far different than most countries' debates. Australians have been hitting the renewable energy market with such utter vigor- as of June, we're talking 3.5 gigawatts of solar power alone, mostly since 2010- that they're actually reporting an oversupply of energy, such that if they don't install one single thing that generates energy for the next decade, they'd still be fine. In South Australia- the one with Adelaide in it- their wind energy alone is sufficient to supply 43% of the state's needs. (To compare, the US Department of Energy has a website titled "20% Wind Energy By 2030", which represents a goal regarded by them as optimistic.)
So that's pretty great, actually... on the face of it. Economics, meanwhile, are proving to be a bit of an issue, as they haven't quite caught up to the reality on the ground. You have coal plants losing money or facing closure save for government subsidies, you have large electrical companies lobbying the Australian government to ease up on infrastructural goals- or even cancel them- because the glut of energy means they can't get as much money supplying it and grid usage is going down besides, and consumers are dually complaining that they're paying too much for something that is at an enormous surplus, and that the price is somehow still going up, which to them makes absolutely zero sense.
The ultimate goal, of course, is to get completely onto renewable energy, whatever intermediate targets you set for yourself along the way. You assure you don't run out, and as a bonus, you're not spewing carbon into the atmosphere at utterly untenable levels. Sometimes that, regrettably, requires breaking the occasional economic egg. If it didn't, we'd be a whole hell of a lot further along the path than we are now. This is the part that requires breaking the egg. If you're really showing commitment to the cause, that subsidized coal plant there just for the sake of jobs is going to have to go; you can do whatever's reasonably possible to retrain the employees. The electrical company is going to have to be told to take it on the chin, since as grid usage is going down, their services are needed less.
Besides, the surplus, which is unprecedented, may not be a thing that sticks around. We do keep using energy, after all. You don't want to give yourself a surplus situation and then ease up so much that you're back to a deficit before you know it. That would be the act of a fool.
But let's see how Australia acts.
Friday, August 8, 2014
A Quick Note About Fireworks
We just now had our big fireworks display of the year in Watertown. Yes, the Fourth of July and all, I know, but in Watertown that's not the biggest fireworks show. The big one is now, a month later, at our annual local festival which, here, we call Riverfest. You probably have a similar festival in your hometown at some point during the summer; this one just happens to be ours.
Towards the end of the show, which I watched from my roof, I saw a dog, with some kind of metal jangling- might be a leash, might be an ID tag- scampering across the neighbor's yard, then under one of our cars, then across our yard, and then around the street corner. I went downstairs to see if I could retrieve him, but by the time I got to the front yard- as the grand finale was going off- the dog was long gone.
This is far from uncommon. Cats and dogs, dogs especially, have very sensitive hearing. This, while a benefit in other aspects of a dog's life, proves highly stressful during fireworks displays, which generate massive pulses of noise for the length of the show, which can typically run half an hour to an hour. As a result, some may break loose and go running, scared out of their wits.
If you have a dog and your town is about to have a fireworks show, it's a very good idea to take precautions to keep them calm or at least in your possession. If you're unsure as to what precautions, here's a handy checklist.
Towards the end of the show, which I watched from my roof, I saw a dog, with some kind of metal jangling- might be a leash, might be an ID tag- scampering across the neighbor's yard, then under one of our cars, then across our yard, and then around the street corner. I went downstairs to see if I could retrieve him, but by the time I got to the front yard- as the grand finale was going off- the dog was long gone.
This is far from uncommon. Cats and dogs, dogs especially, have very sensitive hearing. This, while a benefit in other aspects of a dog's life, proves highly stressful during fireworks displays, which generate massive pulses of noise for the length of the show, which can typically run half an hour to an hour. As a result, some may break loose and go running, scared out of their wits.
If you have a dog and your town is about to have a fireworks show, it's a very good idea to take precautions to keep them calm or at least in your possession. If you're unsure as to what precautions, here's a handy checklist.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)