We Are Free In these Chains

I have concluded my reading of The Tyranny of Words by one of the most prolific exponents and popularizer of General Semantics, Mr. Stuart Chase, just in time for the 2nd meeting of the Victorian Chapter of the Australian General Semantics Society which will again be chaired by Mr. Laurie Cox and Mr. Robert James.

I have read extensively on GS for a while now; Science and Sanity by Korzybski, Language in Thought and Action by Hayakawa, as well as Levels of Knowing and Existence by Weinberg, Science and the Goals of Man by Rapoport and other GS influenced texts by Robert Anton Wilson, Karl Popper and Albert Ellis. I have to say, I have never read such a profound and forward-looking text as Chase's, as he synthesizes the major strands (1933) of semantic thought and guides the reader through a thorough, referent-based analysis of economics, politics, sociology and media reporting. Even his language as he dissects passages filled with higher-order abstraction "blabs" (as he calls them) does not seem dated; rather timeless and loaded with a message that we all should heed as we steer ourselves into waters that are filled with empty references, inaccurate inferences and in some cases, outright fabrications.

One of the more intriguing ideas he raises (although he makes completely brilliant points almost consistently throughout) is that semantic training should be made compulsory for those wishing to seek employ the following professions:

Writers of books and articles dealing with social questions Editorial writers—no exceptions
Reporters and journalists, to keep them from confusing facts with inferences
Government executives
Senators, Congressmen, state and local legislators
Diplomats and writers of state papers
Judges, lawyers, and juries. Every juryman should pass a test in semantics before admission to the box
Lecturers, radio speakers, chairmen of forums, dealing with social problems
Teachers and professors—no exceptions
Mothers and fathers who do not want their children to be
badly hurt when they must face the outside world alone
And all consumers of the verbal output from the above classes — just in case the goods are not as advertised. Semantics might be called a testing bureau for the consumer of language.

Imagine a world communicating as clearly possible! Also, I plan to introduce some points of discussion for tomorrow:

Social media and GS: Are one's Facebook status or tweets regarded as an accurate mapping of the territory?
How can GS principles be used to communicate clearly with others who are untrained in or unfamiliar with GS?

A general write up will follow the meeting.

---

http://twitter.com/crushtor

Straight On 'til Morning

If there's something to be said about political discourse in the United States, its this; people love their tribes. They love being in one camp vs. the other. Not all but some people are tied to the gut with love for their own teams and hard-boiled derision for the other. I always open my eyes wide with surprise whenever I hear a growl of "COME ON!!!" in local bars as their Quarterback races toward a touchdown. But as time wears on during my time living here, my surprise wanes.

On television, the big three news networks are built on similar principles. CNN taking a moderate approach much like its sister TIME Magazine, MSNBC taking on the left-liberal "watchdog" approach as the right Fox News bulldog mauls them with half-truths, distortions and their own version of political correctness; didn't you know that America is a conservative country and liberals are meant to govern in its shadow? Standing before a wall of books in a local Borders store, politics seems to boil down to partisan nit-picking, vituperative retort or self-congratulation with little to no regard for what ideas may benefit the country. Not once since I have been here have I heard a Fox News commentator commending a Democratic politician for a good idea, nor have I heard the same platitudes coming from an MSNBC journalist for a Republican.

I remember in high school during my International Studies class, we had a tireless and unabashed conservative as our teacher. Since I was entering my political education post-9/11, the Iraq War was about to begin. As a neo-realist, he believed the war was just and necessary. However, one remark he made remains as clear as day in my mind; I remember he said something along the lines of:

"The division between the two parties aren't so sharp that they'll fuck up the country. Sure, some people are dissatisfied with [former PM] Howard. But you'll find just as many people upset about Mark Latham if he was Prime Minister."

This viewpoint made the most sense - in a two party system, the prevailing party must capture the center to win government. President Obama promised tax cuts for 95% of Americans during his campaign and likewise Kevin Rudd promised to run as an "economic conservative." Even David Cameron, current UK Conservative Party leader has been described as a "moderate."

For coverage of news here, its a matter of holding up who is "more wrong" to intense scrutiny rather than asking what the facts are and analyzing what the intended and actual effects may be.

---

http://twitter.com/crushtor

Warning: Politicians Talking

Outside my apartment in Atlanta, GA, there's a small post with a fluorescent marker on the top. It reads "WARNING: UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC CABLE." I kind of laughed first off, considering that the only people afraid of Fiber Optic cables are Telstra and the Australian Federal Government. In the US, people lament that their Internet services are sub-standard at best, saying that Asian powers such as South Korea and Japan have got the right idea and are beating them over the heads with it. That may be true; however, if the US are blind, then Australia is blind, deaf, lame and crippled from the waist down when it comes to providing internet - wireless or otherwise - to its citizens.

As huge billboards proclaim that "4G is now in Atlanta" most of Australia can't even manage to lay claim to having workable 3G services in urban areas at even half-affordable prices. Working with the Australian Domain Name Administrator earlier this year, more commonly known as auDA, we had to facepalm ourselves almost constantly every time the Government announced a new "initiative" regarding communications and the internet. We recoiled at how embarrassing our "firm" was presiding over the fair use of domain names when next to no-one could put anything on their websites that people could access with their supposed "broadband" connections (which may or may not be capped. Why do we cap data transfer? Like the IT Crowd chides Jen for wondering why "the internet" feels so light; it doesn't weigh anything.)

First there was the whole content filtering debacle and now the government costs Australian business money by flaking on even the most obvious infrastructure upgrades (Fiber to the home, for instance) that will futureproof domestic communications, even while wireless services catch up to fill the gaps, eventually becoming the standard for rural and regional centers. If the world thought Australia was a joke before, we might as run around with clown masks on now.

If Conroy and co. ever get a clue, please let me know so I can call up Julia and congratulate them myself.
---

And now it's raining and thundering so much here I can't remember a time when I saw such a thing.

---

http://twitter.com/crushtor