Bloggingheads Community

Bloggingheads Community (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/index.php)
-   General comments on Bloggingheads.tv (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=3)
-   -   New diavloggers we'd like to see (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?t=1813)

graz 05-22-2008 01:22 AM

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 
jh, yes to some fine arts . Also, a food ethicist like Michael Pollan or Mark Bittman paired with a more industrial food/agri-business rep.

look 05-22-2008 02:18 AM

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 
TSE, Jeff, Brendan, thanks for the thoughts and links. I see what you mean. Besides the Bell Curve issue, I'd like to hear him expound on the case for Conservatism. His Waugh quote,
Quote:

[Kipling] was a conservative in the sense that he believed civilization to be something laboriously achieved which was only precariously defended. He wanted to see the defences fully manned and he hated the liberals because he thought them gullible and feeble, believing in the easy perfectibility of man and ready to abandon the work of centuries for sentimental qualms.
reminded me of a short book review I'd read on The Wheel of Empire, by Alan Sandison.
Quote:

That’s the message of Alan Sandison’s The Wheel of Empire, which looks at the works of the four greatest novelists of imperial themes—Kipling, Buchan, Conrad, and Haggard. Sandison argues that these writers weren’t swaggering expansionists, but rather anxious soothsayers, predicting all that could go wrong as the 19th century gave way to the 20th. They feared the breaking-down of the old order and the new voices of emotion and disruption (Nietzsche, Treitschke, Freud, the navy leagues, the Harmsworth press, the social Darwinists, the socialists). If you read their works carefully, Sandison argues, you come to understand that these writers emphasized honor and duty and steadfastness not to advance empire, but to preserve order in a fatefully flawed world. Under the thin crust of civilization, Buchan noted, the primal forces were muttering and assembling. To deter their dread efforts, it was vital that young Britons maintain the ramparts. That those ramparts would fall only underscores the delicacy and difficulty of the task.
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200801/imperial-books

bjkeefe 05-22-2008 07:10 AM

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 
look:

I have some sympathy for such attitudes. I do agree that our way of life needs to be defended. On the other hand, excessive insistence that things remain exactly the same as they are right now implies that our way of life cannot be improved, and I certainly reject that attitude. I would also say that it is almost invariably the case that efforts to maintain the status quo, when carried on long enough, work directly against the ideals of what one is trying to preserve. I am thinking here of the perennial temptations of trading off domestic security for liberty, and expanding by force a particular viewpoint with the excuse that it is necessary for defending that status quo.

look 05-22-2008 04:37 PM

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bjkeefe (Post 78200)
look:

I have some sympathy for such attitudes. I do agree that our way of life needs to be defended. On the other hand, excessive insistence that things remain exactly the same as they are right now implies that our way of life cannot be improved, and I certainly reject that attitude. I would also say that it is almost invariably the case that efforts to maintain the status quo, when carried on long enough, work directly against the ideals of what one is trying to preserve. I am thinking here of the perennial temptations of trading off domestic security for liberty, and expanding by force a particular viewpoint with the excuse that it is necessary for defending that status quo.

Brendan, I'm thinking more along the lines of cultural dissolution, for example, the current rage for slasher/cannibal/amputation movies, not to mention first person shooter games, etc. I honestly don't want to debate these, but I'm thinking more along the lines of a quote I heard attributed to TS Eliot (paraphrase) 'a society may eventually become so liberal that it crawls up its own backside.'

Happily, the discussion, for me, goes the other way when discussing things like abortion and birth control. I'm looking optimistically ahead to the time when pregnancies are nipped in the bud routinely, so as to render the arguments about second and third trimester abortions moot, for the most part.

But I would be very interested to hear Derbyshire expound upon his thoughts relating to his Waugh quote above.

bjkeefe 05-22-2008 04:53 PM

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by look (Post 78305)
Brendan, I'm thinking more along the lines of cultural dissolution, for example, the current rage for slasher/cannibal/amputation movies, not to mention first person shooter games, etc. I honestly don't want to debate these, but I'm thinking more along the lines of a quote I heard attributed to TS Eliot (paraphrase) 'a society may eventually become so liberal that it crawls up its own backside.'

There's certainly something to that, and I won't debate you at length about it. I just want to say that no one is compelled to participate in these activities, and it strikes me that those who rail against them the most brand themselves the "family values" crowd. So I say to them: take care of your own families and stop worrying about mine. And as far as the effects of movies on society go, I think Expelled is far more harmful than Hannibal.

I am of course completely with you on the abortion and birth control issues.

look 05-22-2008 05:33 PM

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bjkeefe (Post 78310)
I just want to say that no one is compelled to participate in these activities, and it strikes me that those who rail against them the most brand themselves the "family values" crowd. So I say to them: take care of your own families and stop worrying about mine.

I find your statement dismissive, as I don't brand myself one of the family-values crowd, and I'm curious why you would address 'them' instead of me. As I said earlier, I consider this issue a matter of societal dissolution, and think it worthy of discussion to consider the millions of teens and young adults exposed to this sort of thing, and the long-term effects it could have on their psyches and our society.

Quote:

And as far as the effects of movies on society go, I think Expelled is far more harmful than Hannibal.
I don't think so, but that's irrelevant to the topic at hand. The last word is to you, if you wish.

bjkeefe 05-22-2008 06:58 PM

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 
look:

Quote:

I find your statement dismissive, as I don't brand myself one of the family-values crowd, and I'm curious why you would address 'them' instead of me.
The second part answers the first, doesn't it?

Quote:

As I said earlier, I consider this issue a matter of societal dissolution, and think it worthy of discussion to consider the millions of teens and young adults exposed to this sort of thing, and the long-term effects it could have on their psyches and our society.
I think we already are, and often at tedious length. I'm happy to accept age restrictions and I support efforts to expose kids to alternate forms of entertainment and to work to educate them and make them more sensitive and aware. I don't know how much more we can do without risking what I'd consider censorship that favors one group's tastes over another's. I am also unconvinced that there is that much of a risk, in any case. I've done a fair amount of reading in this area, and the hypothesis that violent movies and games adversely affect children is not often demonstrated.

Quote:

Quote:

And as far as the effects of movies on society go, I think Expelled is far more harmful than Hannibal.
I don't think so, but that's irrelevant to the topic at hand.
I don't see why it's irrelevant. I think it speaks right to the issue at hand -- who gets to decide what is "good" or "bad" for our society, and/or our children? As is clear, you and I can't even agree about one movie compared to another. How could we hope to agree upon anything more general? How could lots of others added to the discussion also agree?

I think most of us can agree on some limitations, particularly as we move to the extremes. But there is a whole mess of other stuff in a big gray area, and everyone's boundaries are different. That's why I'm suspicious every time someone starts talking about needing to clean up society, or to protect the children, or whatever -- there's an implicit assumption that there exists some privileged point of view that can set the standards, but it really turns out that everyone thinks he or she holds that position.

look 05-22-2008 08:21 PM

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bjkeefe (Post 78343)
The second part answers the first, doesn't it?

In case I wasn't clear enough, in the future please address me, and not some imaginary audience.

Quote:

there's an implicit assumption that there exists some privileged point of view that can set the standards, but it really turns out that everyone thinks he or she holds that position.
That is a point I would like to hear Derbyshire to address.

bjkeefe 05-22-2008 08:29 PM

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by look (Post 78359)
In case I wasn't clear enough, in the future please address me, and not some imaginary audience.

Sorry to have offended you, but you were talking about all of society. I was pointing out that one part of society behaves in a certain way that affects the process, while noting that I don't consider you part of that group.

But okay, in the future, I'll bear your request in mind.

Quote:

That is a point I would like to hear Derbyshire to address.
Me, too.

look 05-22-2008 08:59 PM

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bjkeefe (Post 78361)
Sorry to have offended you, but you were talking about all of society.

Yes, and I felt you took it as an opportunity to tell family-valuers to suck it up ("take care of your own families and stop worrying about mine"), when my over-arching concern is for all of society. It won't do a hell of a lot of good for the family-valuers to shelter their children if, in say 50 years, we've become an even more violent society than we are now, and that's pretty violent. That is, it will be dangerous for your grand-kids, my grand-kids, and their grand-kids. I think dangerous appetites are being developed. How many snuff-films were there 20 years ago? How popular will they be in 20 years? How safe will society be in general, and for women in particular?

bjkeefe 05-22-2008 09:46 PM

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by look (Post 78366)
Yes, and I felt you took it as an opportunity to tell family-valuers to suck it up ("take care of your own families and stop worrying about mine"), when my over-arching concern is for all of society. It won't do a hell of a lot of good for the family-valuers to shelter their children if, in say 50 years, we've become an even more violent society than we are now, and that's pretty violent. That is, it will be dangerous for your grand-kids, my grand-kids, and their grand-kids. I think dangerous appetites are being developed. How many snuff-films were there 20 years ago? How popular will they be in 20 years? How safe will society be in general, and for women in particular?

It's hard to be against the idea that you're worried about all of society, but I am. Since you don't like me to speak of abstract groups, I will say it to you: Suck it up. Tend to your own affairs and stop trying to manage mine. Your perceptions are not the same as my perceptions, and I don't want your fears constricting my life.

You think society has gotten more violent. I am not convinced of that. The crime stats directly contradict your perceptions. (See, for example, here and here. More here.)

I am also not convinced that things like violent movies and video games cause society to become more violent, to repeat a point I made earlier. (Here is an article that does a nice job outlining the uncertainty. Here is a wonkier one.)

I do agree that it's worth being concerned about society, and just because I don't think it's particularly more violent doesn't mean I don't think it couldn't be a lot less violent. I'm just dubious about the extent of the problem, especially compared to other negative influences on society. I'm also dubious about the causes you propose and the prescriptions you imply.

ashleyjohnston 05-22-2008 10:17 PM

Noam Chomsky, Anyone?
 
What I wouldn't give to see Bob and Noam put things into a bigger picture. I think even Bob sometimes gets bored with the tedium of current events. I would like a good discussion about the big picture of what is going on.

look 05-22-2008 10:30 PM

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bjkeefe (Post 78369)
It's hard to be against the idea that you're worried about all of society, but I am. Since you don't like me to speak of abstract groups, I will say it to you: Suck it up. Tend to your own affairs and stop trying to manage mine. Your perceptions are not the same as my perceptions, and I don't want your fears constricting my life.

Now, was that so hard?
Quote:

You think society has gotten more violent. I am not convinced of that. The crime stats directly contradict your perceptions. (See, for example, here and here. More here.)
I wonder if the drop in crime is due to the drop in birthrates over the years?
Quote:

I am also not convinced that things like violent movies and video games cause society to become more violent, to repeat a point I made earlier. (Here is an article that does a nice job outlining the uncertainty. Here is a wonkier one.)
I will read those later, but they are only about video games. The second article was written 7 years ago, and games have gotten more realistic and violent in that time. Here is an article related to violent movies:

http://www.jhu.edu/~jhumag/1194web/dietz.html

Quote:

I do agree that it's worth being concerned about society, and just because I don't think it's particularly more violent doesn't mean I don't think it couldn't be a lot less violent. I'm just dubious about the extent of the problem, especially compared to other negative influences on society. I'm also dubious about the causes you propose and the prescriptions you imply.
I didn't imply any prescriptions.

bjkeefe 05-22-2008 11:15 PM

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 
look:

Noted. Nothing to add.

rgajria 05-23-2008 04:59 AM

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 
How about two bloggers discussing traveling or places they have traveled to. Or two bloggers who have traveled to the same place.

rgajria 05-23-2008 04:59 AM

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 
Marxist academic Michael Parenti. He is funny.

bjkeefe 05-23-2008 12:27 PM

Matt Taibbi
 
Matt Taibbi will be on BookTV this weekend, interviewed by David Corn. (details)

look 05-23-2008 04:41 PM

Re: Matt Taibbi
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bjkeefe (Post 78428)
Matt Taibbi will be on BookTV this weekend, interviewed by David Corn. (details)

What a co-inky-dink...I can immediately evaluate TSE's opinion. Thanks for the heads-up, Brendan.

look 05-24-2008 05:35 AM

Philip Weiss
 
Mondoweiss

From his article detailing the events leading up to establishing his blog independently:

Quote:

My Jewishness has long intrigued me. I was raised in a very close-knit scientific family that had a sense of Jewish superiority. Being Jewish was the main thing I was vis-à-vis the world. All my friends were Jewish, and summers we went to a scientific community that was also very Jewish. Only in college did I start to break away from my background, even as I cast long looks back at the tribal.

Once, at a bris, a friend said to me, “You know why we do this?” “Well hygiene—” I started to say. “Bulls--t. We do it to show that we are different.” I struggled with that idea of difference. I sought a wider American experience and married a Christian whose background and values I felt had improved me. Though I still think of myself as being utterly Jewish in my concerns, I recognize that I’m assimilating. On good days, I think that this is the way the world is going. On bad days, I wonder if I haven’t fallen between two cultural stools.

Some of my best blogging came out of that tension. I established a thread called “the Assimilationist,” and when Commentary attacked the new Leonard Woolf biography, saying that he had lived a life of self-hatred in a marriage to an out-and-out anti-Semite in Virginia Woolf, I took the Woolfs’ side. Sure, intermarriage presents cultural challenges, but Commentary was trying to validate Jewish separation by seeing anti-Semitism behind every bush—and Gentile.

Blogging about such matters sometimes made me feel wicked, as though I was betraying my tribe. Shouldn’t some thoughts remain private? But I felt that the form demanded transparency about what I cared about, Jewish identity.
Quote:

My writing [at The Observer] was becoming increasingly anti-Zionist. I visited Israel for the first time last summer, and in the West Bank, I met a South African who told me conditions were worse there than they had been under apartheid. When I got back, I posted a photograph of Arabs forced to worship outside the Damascus Gate to the Old City of Jerusalem because of heightened Israeli security, and a reader of my blog launched an “investigation” and called the photographer, evidently thinking I’d doctored the image.

I knew that Zionists were lobbying The Observer, writing to my editor and the new owner. Peter once said he got more e-mail about me than anything else in the paper. One of these e-mails, copied to me, said there was a “cancer on The Observer.” That was mild. Others commented as “Phil Weiss” and purported to confess my bitterness over bad book reviews I’d gotten or said they had loved having sex with my Christian mother-in-law. One wrote that he wanted to “cut off your head and s--t down your neck.”

One day Peter mentioned that the new owner had passed along one of these complaints and reminded him that the pro-Israel community was one he cared about. Peter said that he defended me, though he asked, “You’re not a Holocaust denier, are you?” “Of course not,” I said. “Good, I thought so.”
Quote:

As the meeting went on with Peter praising my talents in his Ziegfeldian way, I became upset. “Peter, don’t you see what’s happening in this country? Ron [Rosenbaum] just went to Slate. He is pro-Israel. Slate also lately hired Shmuel Rosner, an Israeli who loves the neocons, to write from Washington.” I grabbed a galley of Jeffrey Goldberg’s book from one of the piles in Peter’s office. “Goldberg works for The New Yorker in Washington and because he thought America was dangerous for Jews, he moved to Israel and served in their army, then he moved back here and pushed America to go to war in Iraq. Well, I’m different. I don’t think America is dangerous for Jews, and I’m critical of Israel. And there’s no room for me here. There’s no room.”
Quote:

I’ve relaunched my blog on my own website. At The Observer site, I often felt that I was getting away with something, that it was more fitting for me to peddle my unconventional opinions from my own cart. And now that my blog is separated from a mainstream media address, I’ve noticed that the pro-Israel sirens, who care so much about influencing American leadership, don’t care so much about me.
http://www.amconmag.com/2007/2007_06_04/feature.html

look 05-27-2008 03:31 AM

Re: Philip Weiss
 
I suggest someone like Mickey to conduct the interview. Just two guys discussing what it means to be Jewish in America.

rgajria 05-31-2008 04:27 AM

New Diavloggers
 
Peter Beinart should come back and so should Garance Franke Ruta. Amit Varma who is a libertarian based in India should speak to an American Libertarian. That would be nice.

rgajria 05-31-2008 04:28 AM

Re: Matt Taibbi
 
Real Player keeps timing out for me so I cannot watch the Matt Taibbi interview. I have updated the player, messed with the settings to no good effect.

bjkeefe 05-31-2008 09:24 AM

Re: Matt Taibbi
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by rgajria (Post 79138)
Real Player keeps timing out for me so I cannot watch the Matt Taibbi interview. I have updated the player, messed with the settings to no good effect.

Wish I could offer you the key tip, but all I can say is that it appears to be working for me.

bjkeefe 05-31-2008 10:50 AM

Re: Matt Taibbi
 
Just watched it to completion without a hiccup. Maybe they were having server problems at the time you watched it?

Anyway, good luck.

Big Wayne 06-02-2008 01:48 AM

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Thus Spoke Elvis (Post 77984)
Matt Taibbi? Ugh. Have you ever seen the guy on Colbert or Bill Maher's show? Taibbi in front of a camera is like a deer caught in headlights. I think his writing generally sucks, but he's way, waaay better on the printed page than in an extemporaneous setting.

I used to totally agree. But he's gotten better, I think. I heard (but did not see) his C-SPAN appearance and it was really quite good.

AemJeff 06-07-2008 10:57 PM

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 
Vernor Vinge. It hadn't occurred to me before today's SciSat. He's a fascinating speaker, an idea factory, and a great novelist - reading A Fire Upon the Deep is something few fans of hard science fiction will regret. The guy would be an amazingly cool get.

Also True Names is a seminal work on the specific topic of the Horgan/Yudkowsky diavlog.

Bobby G 06-12-2008 08:55 PM

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 
Thank goodness for this thread. Here's who I nominate:

Daniel Larison--cranky, intelligent paleocon. Seems to be wrong in all his predictions but always has a thoughtful, provocative take on things and also seems to know a ton of stuff.

Mike Rea--super-smart Christian (Dutch Reformed) philosopher. Got into a public spat with Daniel Dennett, writes on material constitution, knows lots of theology.

Alvin Plantinga--super-smart Christian (Dutch Reformed) philosopher. Specializes in metaphysics (esp. modality) and epistemology (came up with his own original version of reliabilism, "Reformed Epistemology"). Lately, he's been doing philosophy of science.

Peter van Inwagen--super-smart Christian (Episcopalian) philosopher who other philosophers are terrified to debate. Specializes in metaphysics (the nature of being, material constitution and personal identity, free will) and philosophy of religion (especially the problem of evil)

Alexander Pruss--super-smart Christian (Catholic) philosopher who also has a Ph.D. in math and writes prolifically at prosblogion.ektopos.com.

Bobby G 06-12-2008 08:56 PM

Re: Noam Chomsky, Anyone?
 
I don't think Chomsky would be good; he tends not to accept disagreement without resorting to name-calling.

bjkeefe 06-12-2008 09:15 PM

Re: Noam Chomsky, Anyone?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Bobby G (Post 80310)
I don't think Chomsky would be good; he tends not to accept disagreement without resorting to name-calling.

Could still work as more of an interview, though. I'm always happy to hear Chomsky, irascible though he may be.

Chef 07-19-2008 03:29 PM

Stephen A. Cook with CFR
 
Over the past several months, there's been a lot of Turkey news (the Erdogan indictment, attack on our Istanbul consulate, Ongoing issues with the PKK, deepending ties between Turkey and Iran.

In 2007, Stepehn A. Cook wrote a book called Ruling but not Governing, about the military's role in the political stability in Egypt, Algeria, and Turkey.

Sadly, I haven't read the book yet, so I can't do it justice, but I think he could provide some great commentary about these regional events.

He's been on BHTV once before, back in the summer of 2006

nikkibong 07-20-2008 07:39 PM

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 
Will Saletan (he can discuss science or politics)
James Fallows
Matt Labash
Nikkibong

AemJeff 07-20-2008 07:46 PM

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by nikkibong (Post 84301)
Will Saletan (he can discuss science or politics)
James Fallows
Matt Labash
Nikkibong

Was that fourth name also a recomendation?http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/images/icons/icon7.gif

nikkibong 07-20-2008 08:35 PM

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 
yep, that's what i was suggesting! ;)

Chef 07-24-2008 08:02 PM

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 
Just finished Anne Applebaum's book "Gulag". Quite moving, especially in her coverage of children born and raised in the Gulag. I know she writes for the Washington Post and is married to a pro-American Polish politician.

I wonder if she would be interested in a bloggingheads episode?

JoeK 07-29-2008 09:30 AM

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 
Would like to see Jim Pinkerton interview Larry Arnhart of Darwinian Conservatism blog.

Also, Jim Pinkerton having his own show, on weekly or bi-weekly basis, would be just swell.
I am sure people who run bloggingheads.tv know better than I what's good for their site, but it seems obvious to me Jim's show would attract the existing bloggingheads fans, while balancing out the content of the whole site ideologically. I don't know if that's considered a bad thing, but I don't remember diavlogs being as skewed to the left as they have become lately.

nikkibong 07-31-2008 05:44 PM

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 
excellent choice on Applebaum, there, Chef; she is one of the few Slate contributors still worth reading.

nikkibong 07-31-2008 05:45 PM

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 
A flash of inspiration:

James Fallows and Patrick Smith (of 'Ask the Pilot' on salon.com) discussing the state of (un)civil aviation today . . .

I've already got your pithy title written for you, BH editors: Mile High Club!

bjkeefe 07-31-2008 05:50 PM

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by nikkibong (Post 85707)
A flash of inspiration:

James Fallows and Patrick Smith (of 'Ask the Pilot' on salon.com) discussing the state of (un)civil aviation today . . .

I've already got your pithy title written for you, BH editors: Mile High Club!

Second the suggestion, like the title.

otto 09-06-2008 01:05 PM

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 
Philip Weiss of Mondoweiss
http://www.philipweiss.org/

And - very different - to interview
Owen Matthews of Newsweek Moscow bureau.
Writing about Russia and Georgia recently, in Newsweek blog, so he has his 'license to blogginghead'
e.g.
http://www.blog.newsweek.com/blogs/o...ing-to-do.aspx

and author of new book "Stalin's Children" about his parents falling in love in Cold War USSR.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Stalins-Chil...0716932&sr=8-1

uncle ebeneezer 09-06-2008 03:54 PM

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 
It also might be interesting for her to Dvlog with Annie Gottlieb(?) whose husband also defected from a Soviet state (if I remember correctly.) She wouldn't necesarrily be an expert on policy, but the annecdotal aspect would probably be pretty interesting.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:54 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.