|
|
Add one part satire to two parts sincerity. Sprinkle on a couple of rants. Stir liberally.
RSS feed coming soon!
Daily Blah FAQ
Who are you?
I'm the newly-appointed Future editor at Business 2.0 and the former San Francisco correspondent for Time Magazine.
Wow, so does this mean everything you write reflects Time Inc's opinion? Or do you perhaps have some sort of standard disclaimer to the effect that it doesn't?
Naturally, the opinions contained in this blog are not those of my employers. In fact, some opinions may be the polar opposite of my employers. Some may be the same, for all I know. Hey, it's not like I ask my employers their opinions about everything in the news, okay? Let's just say that if this were a Venn diagram with one circle marked "my opinions" and the other one marked "my employers' opinions", there would doubtless be some overlap. But neither I nor my employers are able to pinpoint exactly where that overlap is.
What is this Daily Blah thing?
An experiment for a column I wrote about blogging back in December 2001. All these years later, I haven't been able to kick the habit.
If it's called Daily Blah, how come you don't ... hey, wait, you're writing every day!
See? Told you I'd try harder.
Mister, you talk funny. Are you one of them furrners?
Why yes I am, as it happens. I was born, raised and educated in Great Britain. I've been living in the U.S. since 1996 and identify as British.
I say, old chap, you forgot the "u" in "colour."
No I didn't. I may identify as British, but I am also an American journalist writing for an American audience about mostly American issues. These two different sides of me are a constant source of tension. Nevertheless, Daily Blah will adhere to American English grammar and spelling.
Praise for Daily Blah:
"It is fun to watch the author's navel-gazing joy." - Sunday Times (UK)
"It's really funny and informative." - Dave Eggers, author
"The Blah is becoming a daily destination for me." - Richard Marsh, Playwright
"I like it, and I don't." - Fiona Hogg, Teacher
"Better than Xanax." - Lessley Andersen, journalist
"Dude, lay off the crack pipe." - Souris Hong-Porretta, gamesmith
Friends, Bloggers, Countrymen ... lend your ears to these people. I come not to bury them, but praise them.
Arik
Bill
Dan
Cole
Emily B
Emily G
Helena
Jee
Jewelz
Kaila
Kathryn
Mac
Robin
Slim
Souris
Mr. West
My TIME articles
All magazine articles (subscription required for older stories)
Online column index
|
|
|
|
|
Daily Blah for... Thursday, March 25, 2004
Of Chomsky and Change
Woah. Hold the phone. Noam Chomsky effectively told his followers in his blog to vote for John Kerry rather than Ralph Nader. I know -- Noam Chomsky has a blog now? That was Kaila's reaction when she IM'd me. Who knew? Apparently it's part of this progressive blogger collective called "Z Blogs", and Chomsky, darling of the ultra-left, sits in the cube next to "Maggie's Farm."
Oh, Chomsky didn't endorse Kerry in so many words. But that was the point he was trying to make, in his academic cod-poetic way. We have to choose "whether we want to pay attention to the real world"; if we do so, we must "do something to try to prevent" Bush's reelection.
I admire Chomsky as an idealist; I'm just a little wary of him as an academic. I personally agree with him. I think Ralph Nader voters are (to merrily mix my metaphors) deluded myopic ostriches. No argument there. Nor do I fail to appreciate his analysis. He's a compelling thinker, and his linguistic science commands respect. It's just the man's conclusions that feel a little off. Or rather, the firmness of his conclusions. One might almost call him fundamentalist in his belief that no other logical minds could agree on any other possible conclusion from certain political events.
I was listening to an MP3 of Chomsky speaking in the car tonight -- it sounded like it had been bootlegged at some Harvard seminar. About half an hour in, I found myself offering devil's advocate arguments in my mind on behalf of the politicians he was slamming, who in this case happened to be President Clinton and Madeleine Albright. This had been recorded in 1999 or thereabouts, evidently after Clinton had just performed one of those periodic aerial bombings of Baghdad that someday will seem such a 1990's thing (and maybe car bombs in Baghdad will be what the 2000's will be remembered for). Chomsky was laying into Clinton so much, it made me wonder: where was he in 2000? Was he passionately arguing for Gore or was he one of those progressives who held back, stayed lukewarm in that now mythically beautiful long summer, perhaps even endorsed Nader? Did 958 of his Floridian fans saddle us with four years of Bush? Could he have made that difference?
The man seems to allow for too little devil's advocate play within himself or his work, play which seems to me -- good Socratic that I am -- to be one of the most essential and joyful parts of professional philosophy. We've got to keep questioning ourselves and our conclusions. And when we change our minds, admit it to ourselves and our followers. Practice humility. "The only thing I know is that I know nothing." That's the only way anyone achieves any true breakthrough, political or otherwise.
|
|
|
|
