Leiter concentrates on Friedrich Nietzsche’s On the Genealogy of Morality. He argues that Nietzsche was a naturalist and his primary goal was to convince the best people that they shouldn’t pay so much attention to standard Christian morality. It’s time for the revaluation of all values! But only for the strongest, most able among us. They’re the ones who can understand Nietzsche’s message and achieve great things if they can rise above the morality of the herd. Although it’s fine to be nice to less talented people. Just don’t let it hold you back if you’re especially strong and talented.
Monthly Archives: June 2015
Plunder Squad by Richard Stark
Parker needs money and agrees to an art heist, but backs out when he loses confidence in his fellow crooks. Then the chance to pull another art heist comes along. It’s mostly successful until it’s time to exchange the paintings for cash. The middleman is extremely unreliable and things deteriorate from there.
Slayground by Richard Stark
Parker and associates knock over an armored car, but the driver of the getaway car screws up. Parker grabs the loot and runs into an amusement park that’s closed for the season. He stashes the money and then tries to avoid being caught by a gang of local criminals and two crooked cops who know he’s in there with all that cash. Parker escapes but has to leave the money behind (for now).
Selected Thoughts on Recent Events
Once upon a time, it was common to see billboards and bumper stickers calling for Earl Warren, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, to be impeached. Right-wing organizations like the John Birch Society had two principal complaints against him, as set forth in a “wanted” poster from 1958:
Warren is a rabid agitator for compulsory racial mongrelization and has handed down various decisions compelling whites to mix with Negroes in the schools, public housing, in restaurants and in public bathing facilities. He is known to work closely with the N.A.A.C.P. [the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People] and favors the use of force and coercian [sic] to compel white school children to mingle intimately with Negroes.
Warren has been accused of giving aid and comfort to the Communist Party on frequent occasions. He is guilty of inciting riot, disorder and anarchy in Little Rock and elsewhere in his attempts to impose judicial tyranny upon white Southerners. He has illegally transformed the Supreme Court into a Soviet-type politburo with power over the Congress and over the various state governments.
Fortunately, Chief Justice Warren was never in danger of being impeached (although he may have been in danger of being shot). In fact, only one Supreme Court Justice has ever been impeached. That was Samuel Chase back in 1804. The Wikipedia summary says he was impeached for “political bias and arbitrary rulings, promoting a partisan political agenda on the bench”. Sound familiar? The Senate acquitted Justice Chase and since then making ridiculous decisions based on one’s political ideology hasn’t been considered grounds for impeachment. Federal officials generally need to be accused of criminal activity before the House of Representatives will impeach them.
Nevertheless, if “political bias and arbitrary rulings” and “promoting a partisan political on the bench” were ever grounds for impeachment, Justices Scalia, Alito and Thomas would be prime candidates. The three of them were willing to cripple the Affordable Care Act in 34 states because of a single poorly-written phrase, even though it’s standard procedure for the Court to interpret the language in complex laws based on context and legislative intent. Sensible people understood all along that Congress meant to offer subsidies to low-income people in all fifty states. It was only right-wing ideologues like Scalia, Alito and Thomas who thought or claimed to think otherwise.They saw a way to weaken the law and were willing to disgrace themselves in order to purposefully misinterpret it.
If you want to understand the Court’s decision in the Affordable Care Act case, there is a helpful summary on the Court’s website. They call it a “syllabus” and it’s only five pages long. The majority opinion begins at page 6 of the same PDF document and Scalia’s bizarre dissent begins at page 27.
If Scalia were really as angry as his overheated language implies, he would have dropped dead a few pages into his opinion. Maybe next time.
Moving on to other recent events, I’m trying to understand why some people are opposed to gay marriage because they think it will infringe on their own religious liberties. That may be a future topic. Meanwhile, here are two excellent paragraphs from an article by Andrew O’Hehir called “America Is Changing, and Marriage Equality Is a Huge Victory — But We Need To Go So Much Further”:
An entire strain of right-wing commentators, exemplified by Ann Coulter and Bill O’Reilly, have built careers on casting the left as treasonous America-haters who piss on the flag at every opportunity. This is a moment for people who believe in social justice to accentuate the positive, for damn sure. Beyond that, it’s also a moment that makes clear who really hates America – who hates the democratic and egalitarian potential of America, the America that does not quite exist but is struggling to become real. The America that the Coulter-O’Reilly caste claims to love does not exist either, but it never did and never will; it’s not just 1954 but a thoroughly fictional version of 1954, in which women and African-Americans were content to live in subjugation and Latinos, Muslims and LGBT people were invisible….
It’s essentially tragic that so many people feel themselves under attack from the expanded application of basic principles of fairness and justice. It cannot be a good thing that millions of Americans are so imprisoned by toxic ideology that they are unable to share in this collective celebration of hope and happiness, that they seem so determined to wall themselves up in mental ghettoes of intolerance, and that they seem devoted to waging endless rearguard combat in defense of “traditional values” rooted in a constricted understanding of God and the Christian faith and America. As the congregants of Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church told us a week ago in such moving and memorable fashion, love is stronger than hate. Many people in our country who call themselves Christians would do well to reflect on that.
More, but not a lot more, here.
Understanding the International Date Line (Finally)
The International Date Line has bothered me for decades. Not because I have anything against international agreements and not because I’ve ever traveled across the Pacific. It’s just been very puzzling. Why is it a different day of the week on opposite sides of an imaginary line in the middle of the Pacific Ocean? Is it always one day to the west of the Date Line and another day to the east? Even though it’s, say, the middle of the afternoon? How can that be the place where it’s a different day in adjoining time zones, when it’s a new day in every time zone as soon as the clock strikes 12 midnight? How can there be two places in the world where it’s a new day?
The concept has never made any sense. Which is why it was a relief when I finally figured out the damn thing a few weeks ago. What I apparently needed all these years was a visual representation of the globe showing what happens to the day of the week as the Earth goes about its business. Something like this:Â
(1) First off, it isn’t true that it’s always a different day of the week on opposite sides of the Date Line. There is one hour every day when it’s the same day of the week on both sides: when it’s between 11 p.m. and 12 midnight in New Zealand, it’s the same day of the week everywhere. That’s line (1) in the diagram. At 11 p.m. in New Zealand, when Monday is almost done, Monday is just beginning at Midway Island in the middle of the Pacific.
(2) Then, when the clock strikes 12 midnight in New Zealand, the next day of the week makes its first appearance in that single time zone. (That’s why Kiwis celebrate the New Year before the rest of us.)
(3) As the hours proceed, more time zones join the new day. By the time it’s 1 p.m. in New Zealand, it’s 10 a.m. in Beijing, 2 a.m. in London and striking midnight out in the Atlantic. The new day is moving westward around the world as each hour passes. But notice that it’s still the previous day on Midway, even though New Zealand and Midway Island are in adjoining time zones and it’s early afternoon in both places. It’s strange but true.
(4) Eventually, the new day arrives in America. In effect, the new day is growing and the old day is shrinking.
(5) The new day makes its way across the Pacific, engulfing Hawaii but leaving Midway at yesterday.
(6) Until finally, it’s the same day of the week all over the world again (for an hour anyway).
So it isn’t the case that it’s always two different days on opposite sides of the Date Line. And aside from one hour each day, there are always two boundaries between one day and the next: at the Date Line and also where the clock is striking 12 midnight.
One last question: Why do we need an International Date Line? I think it’s to avoid a contradiction. Let’s assume it’s 1 p.m. in New Zealand and 2 p.m. on Midway Island, as shown in line (3) above, but there is no Date Line. So we’ll also assume it’s Sunday in both places.
Then look west toward Africa and Europe. When it’s 1 p.m. in New Zealand, it would be Sunday at 12 midnight in the Atlantic. That means, of course, that it would still be Saturday night a bit further west in New York City.
But then look east from New Zealand toward North and South America. If it’s 1 p.m. Sunday in New Zealand, it’s Sunday night in California and early Monday morning in New York.
However, it can’t be both Saturday night and Monday morning in New York (think of the confusion). That’s why we need an International Date Line. A mathematician could probably explain it in technical terms. In practical terms, the Date Line helps make sure there’s a definite answer to the question: What’s today?

You must be logged in to post a comment.