text:
Archived Best of the Web
Climate History Podcast
Databases >
CLIWOC
Select Student Essay Abstracts from "A Global History of Climate Change," Georgetown University
Sunset on the Hilltop.
Introduced by Professor Dagomar Degroot.
This semester, I taught a course about the environmental history of climate change. My students were a diverse and passionate group. None were history or science majors, and two were foreign exchange students. I challenged them with a difficult essay assignment that encouraged them to think like a professor of environmental history. This is a condensed version of the assignment instructions:
"Choose a topic relevant to the history of climate change. Be as creative as possible! Next, hunt for primary and secondary sources that will let you write an essay about your topic. You can also search through Georgetown's libraries, the National Archives, the Library of Congress, and other resources in Washington, DC. Your secondary sources should include at least six books, where one book is equivalent to two articles. A scholar who is not a historian must have written at least two of your books (or four of your articles).
"If I approve your topic and sources, write an original, 15-page environmental history of climate change. Primary sources should be central to your thesis, but your interpretation of these sources, and your investigation of their context, should be supported by secondary sources. Be sure to contextualize your thesis in light of the arguments raised in your secondary sources (we will discuss how to do this in class).
"Write a one-paragraph, single-spaced abstract of your essay. With your permission, I will post your abstracts on HistoricalClimatology.com. You will be able to browse one another's abstracts, and people from around the world will learn about climate history through your research."
My students responded with some wonderfully creative and sophisticated essays. Here are some of their abstracts:
Three Years of Arctic Hell: Europe, Climate and War, 1939-1942
Between 1939 and 1942, a global climatic disruption occurred, bringing extreme weather conditions to much of the world. The disruption signaled a transition from the warmer climate of the early 20th century to the cooler climate of the mid 20th century. In Europe, the climatic disruption had particularly acute impacts because of the ongoing influence of World War II. Using speeches, newspaper reports, and diaries, I show how the weather caused by the climate disruption altered conventional battle plans of states and changed the psychologies of soldiers fighting on the battlefield. Developing an understanding of climatic disruptions is particularly important because human activities are increasingly contributing to abrupt climate changes.
The Effects of Climate Change on Social Instability Through the Lens of the Syrian Civil War
It is important to consider not only how to end the war, but how to prevent wars like it in the future. As a result, observing the big picture of the crisis can allow many of the aforementioned issues with the Syrian regime to be prevented. It is important that governments across the world note the potential effects that climate change may have on the instability of a country. As leaders gather across the world to discuss how to save the planet from rising sea levels and warming temperatures, they should also note the potential to save thousands of lives from conflict between nations or within nations regarding scarce resources. If governments were able to coalesce around means to limit climate change, countries could see the results across all sectors, politically, economically, and ecologically.
Climate Change, its Influence on Agriculture, and the Course of Irish History in the 18th and 19th Century
Climate change played a significant role in changing Ireland's agriculture in the 18th and 19th century. I examine W. Bence Jones's first-hand journal written for the Royal Agricultural Society of England in 1873. He describes the climate and agriculture of Ireland, and how the agriculture has changed over time with the weather. Then, by looking at three major famines of Ireland, I assess how climate change indirectly influences political, social, and religious aspects of Ireland through its impact on agriculture.
Climate Causes Crisis: How Syrian Refugees are Environmental Refugees and Why They Should Be Protected As Such
The crisis in Syria can best be explained as a complex combination of many factors, all of which ultimately tie to a changing climate in the Fertile Crescent. One of the worst droughts to ever hit the region resulted in a water shortage, which created conflict over resources, compounded social stressors and diminished the state's ability to react to the situation. Together, these factors encouraged millions of Syrians to flee the violence that ensued. I will argue that because this mass migration was ultimately caused by climatic forces, the Syrian migrants should be labelled as environmental refugees, and the United Nations should recognize them as such. Only then will we be able to care for the millions more who will be displaced due to climate change in the near future.
Main Contributors to Low-Lying Island Migrants
Climate changes in the last several decades have mostly been attributed to anthropogenic green house gas emissions. These climactic changes go far beyond an increase in temperature, creating hostile conditions for people around the world and forcing them to leave their homes as climate migrants. For low-lying islands, particularly the near the Pacific Ocean, the threat of their submergence because of climate-related rising sea-levels is increasingly popularized in many media outlets. While inundation and erosion that lead to the disappearance of islands should not be disregarded, they are not the major threat. Through several first-hand accounts of the deteriorating conditions in low-lying islands, its is obvious that the lack of food, water, and other adverse socio-economic conditions exacerbated by climate change, are presenting the biggest threat for climate migrants.
Analyzing the Effects of Drought on the Early Settlers of the The Parched Colony: Jamestown Colony, 1607-1611
 The extreme drought conditions in early-17th century Jamestown revealed by both dendrochronological analysis and oyster shell composition analysis was the underlying factor which caused malnutrition, disease and strained Anglo-Indian trade relations among the early English settlers of the Chesapeake Bay region between 1607 and 1611. These three ramifications were exacerbated or perhaps even caused by the drought, and ultimately gave rise to the monumentally high mortality rate (50%+ in the first 5 years) experienced by the early Jamestown settlers. Historical accounts written by the settlers themselves, namely John Smith and George Percy, will be used to corroborate scientific evidence, with both sources indicating an adverse and inhospitable Virginia climate. Though determining any one cause of death in such a deadly environment like Jamestown, with such a myriad of potentially lethal factors, drought will be shown as the main climate "sickness" whose symptoms ultimately killed most of the early Virginia settlers.
The Fifth Column: the Role of Climate Change in the American Civil War
The American Civil War is traditionally conceived as a political and military conflict between two competing visions of governance in the United States. This view, while compelling, ignores the role of climate-driven stressors on the outbreak and outcome of the war and produces an incomplete account of one the United States' most important historical episodes. This paper combines firsthand accounts of participants in the conflict, most notably recollections of Union and Confederate officers, and modern studies of Civil War environmental history to correct this mistake. Moderate fluctuations in the Earth's climate resulted in myriad unpredictable weather patterns that exacerbated underlying political tensions, driving the country towards war, and even altered the day-to-day planning of officials on both sides by altering the terrain, access to supplies, and exposure to deadly diseases.
Settling the Dust: Effects of Precipitation Cycles on the American Civil War
Historians have often neglected to take into account the importance of weather and climate patterns on historical events. This paper argues that unusually high levels of precipitation in the winter and spring, recorded by an amateur meteorologist named Reverend C. B. Mackee, played a significant role in the outcomes of three major military expeditions during the American Civil War. In order to determine whether these high levels of precipitation were an anomaly or a reflection of a larger climate pattern, data collected from tree rings is also referenced. These data provide information about largerscale climatic patterns in the eastern United States for the past 1,000 years. The essay explores the effects of precipitation on Union General Ambrose E. Burnside's infamous "Mud March" in 1862 and Confederate General T. J. "Stonewall" Jackson's march on Romney in 1862 and his march on Chancellorsville in 1863.
Climate Change and the Qing Dynasty: The Paradox of the Yellow River
While climate change was not the only influence of historic changes in China, historians must start to analyze its large impact on the development of Chinese history. This paper studies the impact of climate change on the agricultural society of the Qing Dynasty. I use "Memorandum relative to the Improvement of the Hwang-ho or Yellow River in North-China" published by the Royal Dutch engineer J. G. W. Fijnje van Salverda in 1891 to demonstrate the significance of the Yellow River to Chinese civilization. I use this geographic landmark as a foundation from which to evaluate aspects of climate change, including floods and droughts that created the need for water management practices. Temperature fluctuations during the era had significant economic, social, and political impacts on Chinese society, leading to social instability and influencing the formation of the dynastic cycle theory. Finally, I explore the implications of anthropogenic environmental change from the case study of the legend of Yu the Great to premodern China.
jaeseu
Thanks for such a pleasant post. This post is loaded with lots of useful information.
Keep it up. If you are looking for the best information and suggestions related to J9KOREA then visit us.
안전 카지노 사이트
카지노 검증 사이트
카지노 가입 쿠폰
https://www.j9korea.com


text:
The Navel Observatory
How Do You Get Away With Writing Something Like This?
October 31, 2015 October 31, 2015 / Nathan J. Robinson
Some days I think I am not cynical enough. An item from the Washington Post, by a man named Ed Rogers, runs as follows:
FBI Director James Comey has made two recent speeches where he warns us there is an emerging trend of police officers standing down or demonstrating reluctance to engage criminals because they are worried about sparking a situation similar to the riots in Ferguson, Mo., and Baltimore. Comey's comments do not fit the Obama administration's narrative on crime, and drew criticism from civil rights activists, law enforcement unions and the White House. Well, what do these groups have in common? That's easy — they're almost all Democrats, and they may be going down a slippery slope of promoting policies that have the effect of being pro-crime and anti-gun at the same time. Calling Democrats "pro-crime" may sound a tad harsh, but if you are for inhibiting police activity, causing fewer arrests and making mass releases from prison, what else would you call it? The politics of this issue are not fully formed, but if the Democrats don't watch it, they run the risk of being the "pro-crime" party in the United States.
Now, I always like to assume that people I disagree with are operating in good faith; that they are generally decent instead of malicious, and not trying to distort or propagandize but merely seeing things through a different lens. And so my instinct, with something like this, is to start to patiently explain why it's wrong. The FBI director has said, without any evidence (he has "a sense"), that Black Lives Matter is causing the crime rate to rise. Ed Rogers quotes the FBI director as if his hunch is factual, then dismisses all criticism because the people making it are Democrats rather than because they're actually wrong on the facts. Then, using his assumption that crime is increasing because of criminal justice reformers, which he still has no evidence for, Rogers concludes that Democrats are now a pro-crime party. (Note the way he dismisses police objections to the FBI Director's suggestion: police = "law enforcement unions"; somehow police unions are now members of the radical pro-crime left!)
Oh, but Jesus, why bother? Why even bother? I could spend 10,000 words carefully unweaving and analyzing Rogers's falsehoods. But what could possibly persuade someone who thinks his opponents are literally in favor of crimes, i.e. that Democrats like to see people get raped and robbed? That would make all Democrats basically callous monsters, which I think Rogers might even say they were. You can't have a sensible discussion with someone like that; I'm willing to assume that he's operating in good faith, but he's assuming that my side wants people to be victimized by crime.
Sometimes, when I read stuff like this, and get angry about it, my friends ask me why I pay any attention to it. "I mean, yeah, what do you expect?" they say.
"Well, this was in the Washington Post! That's a major national newspaper!" I reply. "What kind of editor publishes an assertion like 'democrats have caused crime to go up and are pro-crimes' and demands no factual support?"
"Yeah," says my cynical friend. "I guess I don't really have as much respect for the Washington Post as you do. And I don't really spend much of my time thinking about what some right-wing dick said about Democrats."
Look, my friend is right. I shouldn't get exercised over this. The problem is that I am desperate to assume that the extreme cynical perspective, which is that even our major national newspapers will print any old shit, and that people on the right are often not sincere disagreers but manipulative fabricators, is not true. I really don't want to accept that conclusion, because I think it's cheap, and I think it's very easy to dismiss your opponent by just scoffing "You're not serious" than actually engaging with the substance of what they have to say.
But I've looked at the substance of what Ed Rogers has to say. He's deliberately misstating what motivates criminal justice reformers, and he's attempting to convince his readers that something he has no evidence for is true. His editor bears equal responsibility, for allowing someone to repeat such an outrageous claim without any documentation.
I don't mean to be a cynic. I really don't want to be one. I want to clearly and carefully dissect arguments, because people on the right say that leftists argue with emotion rather than logic, and dismiss them as evil without hearing them out. But I heard them out on this. And I saw no logic, no substance. Just an unproven assertion, and then denunciation and innuendo. I saw a person who is a high-ranking political commentator telling me that I like crime, for no reason other than that I think police should be slightly more disinclined to shoot black men in the forehead. What kind of dishonesty is this? How can I be expected to engage in sober-minded political discussion when this is the level we're at? How can I keep myself from coming to the conclusion that people like Ed Rogers are operating in bad faith, and are shameless propagandists wilfully opposed to the truth? I can't think of a way. The evidence is clear, and though I'm loath to admit it, people on the right really often are manipulative fabricators, and the media really will just print any old shit.
List of B-List Pundits Who Have Now Blocked Me On Twitter
Kevin D. Williamson of the National Review
Christine Fair of Georgetown University's School of Foreign Affairs
Amanda Marcotte of Slate
List to be updated as further pundits become annoyed.
The Childish Christine Fair and the Necessity of Advocates
October 28, 2015 November 2, 2015 / Nathan J. Robinson
Christine Fair is a professor at Georgetown University's School of Foreign Service. She holds a PhD from the University of Chicago, has worked for the United Nations, has an extensive publication record, and has been quoted in major news outlets around the world. It is fair to describe her, I think, as a serious public intellectual and a member of the academic and policy elite.
Prof. Fair is therefore extremely useful as a case study in just how childish, unpleasant, biased, and ignorant one can be while retaining significant influence and respectability, as well as a major academic post.
Let's examine the facts, in order to determine whether my characterization of Prof. Fair is true. First, let's start with a debate Prof. Fair had on the Al Jazeera television network with civil liberties activist and national security journalist Glenn Greenwald. In the debate, Mr. Greenwald took the position that United States drone strikes in Pakistan cause more harm than good, while Prof. Fair took the opposite position.
The debate did not go well. Personally, I attribute this in large part to Prof. Fair's insistence on repeatedly interrupting each of the two other participants and refusing to wait until it was her turn to speak, but you should watch it yourself and make an independent evaluation. Let me transcribe a significant excerpt from the debate, so that we may examine and critique it together. It is long, but I think it's a hell of a lot of (exasperating) fun. [I have tried to capture everything people said, but there was a significant amount of crosstalk.]
HOST: What do the leaked documents published by the Intercept tell us that's new, that in your view strengthens the case against drones?
GLENN GREENWALD: What they do primarily is confirm what the people who live in the regions where the drones have been killing people have been saying, which is that far more often than not they're killing people not who are the targets but who are actually innocent. [Our source has indicated that] 9 out of 10 of the people are not the targets. And you've heard this from people in Afghanist and and Pakistan continuously, you've heard this from researchers and scientists and other people who have studied it, that the reason we're constantly turning more people into terrorists than we're actually killing is because the anger and rage from these innocent victims is what causes people to then want to bring violence to the United States.
HOST: Christine Fair, you've called drones "the most successful tool the United States and Pakistan have to eliminate dangerous militants, but if 9 out of 10 drones strikes are not getting the people they're supposed to, how is that successful?
PROF. FAIR: Actually, I'm going to push back on several things Glenn said. Many of the statements he just made are not empirically buttressed, many of the people who write about this actually haven't been to Pakistan where the drones are actually used, and so you actually have this problem: we don't know who was targeted and we don't know who was actually killed. And I'm actually going to argue that this actually isn't knowable with the tools that have been used thus far. [The conclusion of the journalist who has studied this in the most empirically defensible way is that] according to the locals themselves, about 90% of those killed were militants. So we have a big difference between those who are based in Lahore, the cosmopolitan elites, who view drones as a violation of Pakistani sovereignty and all the legal issues that get raised, but when you talk to the people who live in the proximity of the militants, they actually have a very different story.
[crosstalk]
HOST: Let Glenn respond.
GLENN GREENWALD: There's actually a person who lives in the region, [Malala Yousafzai] who happens to be the winner of the 2014 Nobel Peace Prize,
PROF. FAIR: Who doesn't know anything about FATA.
GLENN GREENWALD: She actually went to the White House…
PROF. FAIR: She knows nothing about FATA.
GLENN GREENWALD: …and spoke with President Obama, and what she said was not "Thank you so much for using drones to kill the militants who put a bullet into my head and are trying to suppress the rights of girls," what she said in her statement is "I expressed my concern that drones are fueling terrorism. Innocent victims are killed and they lead to resentment among the Pakistani people. It's the same conclusion from the NYU-Stanford study, and the lead reporter on the story in The Intercept on drones is Jeremy Scahill who has spent many years in all of the regions in which drones are used, including Afghanistan, Yemen, Somalia…
PROF. FAIR: He's not spent any time in Pakistan. This is fictional nonsense.
GLENN GREENWALD: He made a film that was nominated for an Academy Award. He wrote a 600-page book called Dirty Wars. There is abundant evidence that drones are killing innocent…
PROF. FAIR: No, there's not.
GLENN GREENWALD: …people, you have to be pathological to deny it at this point.
PROF. FAIR: I guess all Muslim countries and all Muslim polities and all Muslim legal systems are the same to you. I actually bring nuance to this.
HOST: Well, Christine, let me put some nuance to you. The British government did polling in Pakistan's tribal areas a few years ago. This is the British government on CIA drone strikes. They found, in the tribal areas, 59% of the public in 2010 said they were never justified. That went up to 63% in 2011. So the polling doesn't quite support what you're saying.
PROF. FAIR: No, no, actually, do you understand how polling… I actually do a lot of polling in Pakistan. What you find is that a lot of people don't answer the question at all.
HOST: But the ones who do.
PROF. FAIR: Well, you're missing the science of this. This is called "social desirability bias." So, I'm going to argue that it's very difficult to do this well because the person doesn't know the person doing the survey work. Now, I also want to go back to the NYU report. I'm pro-choice. If Planned Parenthood did a study that talked about the benefits of abortion, we would immediately call the nonsense flag on that report. The NYU/Stanford study was supported, facilitated, in every way, shape, or form, by FFR [Foundation for Fundamental Rights] and Reprieve, which is an advocacy group avowedly against drones. They did not include any of the pro-drone voices.
HOST: The British government, though, are not an adovacy group against drones. So you dismissed the British government.
PROF. FAIR: No, no, what I'm saying, and again the nuance may not be appreciated here. Polling work in conflict areas is very difficult to elicit the truth because the person does not know whether the survey person in question is CIA, ISI, or a miltiant.
HOST: So are you saying we can't know?
PROF. FAIR: I'm telling you we can't know, but I want to go to the point of Ababil.
HOST: Very briefly.
PROF. FAIR: It is a very brief point, because this speaks to how some people view the drones which are very different from people like Glenn Greenwald.
HOST: Okay.
PROF. FAIR: You're familiar with Surah Al-Fil in the Koran, where an army of elephants attacked the Ka'aba…
HOST: I'm worried this isn't going to be brief.
PROF. FAIR: I'm going to tell you how brief it is. You should know the Koran, I'm presuming. Surah Al-Fil. So, the black swallows who dropped stones to repel the elephant army that was attacking Ka'aba, those who live in proximity to the terrorists, they call drones Ababil. So this is a voice that you folks try to exclude.
HOST: Glenn Greenwald, you're not being nuanced.
GLENN GREENWALD: This is just rank propaganda at this point.
PROF. FAIR: [interrupting] It's not rank propaganda!
GLENN GREENWALD: You have this mountain of evidence…
PROF FAIR: [interrupting] You don't know data!
GLENN GREENWALD: …Are you capable of remaining quiet while other people speak?
HOST: Christine, let Glenn…
PROF. FAIR: [continuing to speak] Are you capable of even being truthful and using data?
HOST: Christine, let Glenn make his point and then I'll…
GLENN GREENWALD: There is this mountain of evidence, you have…
PROF. FAIR: There's no mountain of evidence!
HOST: Hold on! Christine, let Glenn make his point.
GLENN GREENWALD: You have the NYU-Stanford study.
PROF. FAIR: Which is not a study, it's advocacy.
GLENN GREENWALD: You have the Bureau of Investigative Journalism.
PROF. FAIR: Advocacy.
GLENN GREENWALD: You have the documents that were just provided to us by this source.
PROF. FAIR: Which is Afghanistan, not Pakistan.
GLENN GREENWALD: You have the statement of the 2014 Nobel Prize Winner…
PROF. FAIR: A 16-year-old girl!
HOST: Hold on, hold on, you're not letting Glenn make his point.
PROF FAIR: Because he's a liar. He's a liar.
HOST: He's quoting reports! You can respond to the reports when…
PROF. FAIR: These are not evidence, these are advocacy.
One Wonderful Thing About America
I'm down on America a fair amount of the time. But one thing I love about it is that you don't get things in the news like this item out of Britain, in which the novelist Martin Amis calls the Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn "undereducated," saying:
He is undereducated. Which is one way of putting it. His schooling dried up when he was 18, at which point he had two E-grade A-levels to his name; he started a course at North London Polytechnic, true, where he immersed himself in trade union studies but dropped our after a year. And that was that.'
Amis isn't the only one to criticize Corbyn's educational background, with the Spectator lamenting the fact that Corbyn's cabinet has many members from universities other than Oxford and Cambridge:
Under Corbyn, the Labour party — once the clever party — has had a brain transplant. It's out with the Oxbridge and Harvard graduates with first-class degrees; in with the red-brick university graduates. Or, in Corbyn's case, a non-graduate. Corbyn got two Es at A-level at Adams' Grammar School in Newport, Shropshire. He did a year of trade union studies at the North London Polytechnic before dropping out… Let's not be snobbish. Those universities [Hull, Sussex, etc.] are good. But it isn't snobbery to point out that they aren't as good as Oxford or Cambridge — second and fourth respectively in the Times Higher Education World University Rankings, published last week. Hull is 401st equal. Jeremy Corbyn's alma mater, now London Metropolitan University, doesn't make the 800-strong list… [D]o we want our top politicians to be drawn from the lower ranks of academia? Labour was traditionally the intellectuals' party. The late Denis Healey got a double first in Greats at Balliol, the brainiacs' Oxford college. Harold Wilson got an outstanding first in PPE at Jesus College, Oxford, with alphas on every paper. Wilson became a lecturer at New College and a research fellow at University College.
Look at this rubbish! As the late Christopher Hitchens once so graphically put it, I couldn't eat enough to vomit enough. (Here's another one from the Telegraph, which posits that Jeremy Corbyn is "too thick" to be Prime Minister and laments that he didn't go to Oxford like Martin Amis.)
Now, say what you will about America, but this kind of overt class snobbery is just not displayed here. (We can note with amusement that the Spectator insists it is would never be snobbish, by patronizingly acknowledging that non-Oxbridge universities can be "good," before immediately posing the question of whether politicians should be drawn from the "lower ranks" of academia.)
Of course, in the U.S. it's no less true that the graduates elite schools dominate the government. But it's much less acceptable to announce some kind of principle that only the graduates of certain wealthy schools should be allowed into governmental office. In fact, it's often taken as a point of pride that somebody "dropped out of school at age 9" or whatever, and then worked their way to some position. And people like George Bush are ridiculed for being thumpingly stupid despite having attended elite schools. I think there's just a certain lack of conflation of "schooling" with "education" here. Many of our most respected intellects (Lincoln, Mark Twain, etc.) were relatively unschooled, and there is simply a much greater respect for autodidacts and the self-made here. As I say, it's a bit of a lie, since we give lip service to equal opportunity and then simply reward the children of the elite. Nevertheless! At least the value we nominally hold would be sound if we acted upon it.
I really can't believe that major newspapers in Britain can print this stuff. But then again, Britain is still a monarchy, still a country of bewigged jurists like "Lord Justice Laws." In many ways, it still hasn't escaped its feudal past. So there are still plenty of people there who believe failing your exams makes you a fool, instead of just making you someone who hates school because it's a soul-killing conformity-factory of neverending mindless tedium. Elements of the British public have a hard time understanding this, because Britain itself as a country is, by many measures, a soul-killing comformity factory of neverending mindless tedium. It's also a place where rank snobbery and class prejudice can be passed off as serious political commentary, and where somehow people who pride themselves on their superior intellects can spectacularly fail to see the shallow irrationality of their own elitist arguments.
I hereby swear not to write anything else about Jeremy Corbyn for a reasonable amount of time.
How to Select Your Statistic to Reinforce Your Political Bias
October 27, 2015 / Nathan J. Robinson
This article in the British Evening Standard is a fascinating lesson in how to manipulate statistics to serve a political bias. The article is about the head of the Labour party, Jeremy Corbyn, who is extremely controversial because of his far-left socialist politics. A large portion of the narrative around Corbyn in the conservative British press has been that he is supposedly "too radical" for the country. The argument conservatives make is that by selecting Jeremy Corbyn as leader, the Labour party has discredited itself with mainstream voters and committed electoral suicide.
The Evening Standard article offers a headline that appears to offer hard data to support this conclusion. The headline reads: Dump Jeremy Corbyn before election, say 42% of voters, and the article indeed gives poll results showing that 42% of surveyed adults believed the Labour party should get rid of Corbyn. The first paragraph of the article also reports, accurately, that only 31% of people disagreed, meaning that more people think Jeremy Corbyn should go than stay.
But look at the chart reporting the statistics, for these are not the only numbers we have. There, we see that in a poll taken last summer during the tenure of Jeremy Corbyn's predecessor, Ed Miliband, 49% of people believed Miliband should go, versus 30% that he should stay. Now, consider the fact that British conservatives believed Ed Miliband lost the election because he was "too far to the left." These commentators, who include Tony Blair, believed that if Miliband was too far left for the country, then Corbyn was way too far left, hence the argument that a Corbyn leadership would take the party off a cliff.
But what the poll results in the Evening Standard show is that fewer voters want to get rid of Jeremy Corbyn than wanted to get rid of Ed Miliband. One could just as easily write an article with the same poll results using the headline "Corbyn already outstrips Miliband in popularity," and write an article about how, despite having been in office only a month, Jeremy Corbyn has already managed to have more voters want to keep him than Ed Miliband, completely destroying the narrative that he's more fringe than Miliband was.
The real place the bias of the Evening Standard shows, though, is in the way it reports the 42% statistic instead of the same poll's measure of the satisfaction ratings for Jeremy Corbyn and Prime Minister David Cameron. As you can see in the chart, the poll asked whether people were "satisfied" with the way each was doing his job. For David Cameron, 42% were satisfied versus 51% dissatisfied. For Jeremy Corbyn, 37% were satisfied versus 39% dissatisfied. For both men, then, more people are dissatisfied than satisfied. But the chart shows that David Cameron has a favorability rating of -9%, while Jeremy Corbyn has a favorability rating of -2%. Cameron's ratio of dissatisfied people to satisfied people is far higher than Corbyn's.
These poll results are actually extremely encouraging for Corbyn. More than half the country thinks David Cameron is doing a bad job, while only 39% of the country thinks Corbyn is! Look at how many more people were undecided on Corbyn than on Cameron. 24% of people didn't say satisfied or unsatisfied. That means that Corbyn has a huge opportunity to win people over who haven't made their minds up about him yet. Cameron, on the other hand, faces the challenge of trying to recapture the opinions of the more than half the country that thinks he is doing a bad job.
Setting aside the fact that these numbers are actually hopeful for Corbyn, they certainly should make us far more cautious about concluding that Corbyn is some fringe radical who has turned off the entire electorate. That's just clearly untrue. In fact, he's viewed more favorably than David Cameron.
So what we can see here is the biased selection of statistics in action. The Evening Standard, a conservative newspaper, intentionally tries to manipulate its readers into thinking things are going worse for Corbyn than they are. They put the damaging statistics at the front, and bury the positive ones, because by doing this they can pretend that the "too radical" argument is correct, when it is in fact incorrect by their very own measures. This is propaganda, not journalism.
Note that I don't think the headline should be "Corbyn's favorability ratings exceed Cameron's" either; choosing the pro-Labour statistic is just as bad. The balanced headline would say something like "Corbyn viewed less negatively than Cameron, but 42% of voters still want him to go." But of course, that's still a bit pro-Conservative, because that 42% is really pretty meaningless without context. Note that it's a general poll of adults, not a poll of Labour supporters. So of course that 42% is probably going to be made up of a majority of Conservative voters. Some of those will want Corbyn to stay (because they think he's unelectable) and some of them will want him to go (because he's a socialist), but it's really hard to give meaning to the 42% without more in-depth data. Probably shouldn't report it as a headline no matter what.
(By the way, the Evening Standard is not alone in selectively reporting poll results to make them appear less favorable to Corbyn than they actually are. Richard Seymour has a breakdown of a similarly manipulative exercise that took place in the Independent last month, who reported that Jeremy Corbyn had "lost a fifth of Labour voters" without mentioning that many more people were likely to enter the Labour party because of Corbyn than leave it.)
Dream Diary: "Mailer"
On an October evening in Massachusetts, Norman Mailer sat down at his typewriter and, with a few short paragraphs, defined an entire school of criticism that would remain dominant for half a century.
I awaken on my sofa. All of the windows in the house are open, and I forget if they have screens. I sense that someone has entered during my nap, that I hear a noise coming from the hall. It was not dark when I dozed off, but it is dark now. I stand up and stretch, my fear beginning to well.
The evidence of Mailer's gift, of course, was that he himself never returned to the style that would make him famous. A few short paragraphs, a pagelong manifesto written hastily in the scope of an evening at the age of 26, then he would spend the rest of his career moving in and out of other styles. But in a single piece of criticism, Mailer had written paragraphs so electric, sentences so crystalline and bold, that he would never be matched, or even approached, by any of the ten thousand imitators that were to come.
I walk down the hall. All of the lights are on but there are shadows, in which something could easily lurk. I am starting to panic. In the kitchen, there are three windows, all open wide to the night sky. Not even pausing to see if they have screens, or if the screens are intact, I pull each of them shut. I dart through the house, closing every window. But with every one I close, I only seem to grow more afraid.
The most fitting aspect of all, perhaps, was Mailer's chosen appellation for that dazzling voice, the one he spoke in for a single page and then never again. He wryly called it "The New Escapism." And truly, he could not fully realize how well it applied. For what is striking, reading those five hundred words again, fifty years after they were written, is the feeling that one is having one's very own thoughts gathered up by a burglar and ferreted away. That one is running about, frantically closing windows, but that Mailer has taken one's every original thought, and condensed it into a single word or phrase. This brings along with it a certain fear; the fear that if one does not stop Mailer before the sixth paragraph, he will have made all further thought irrelevent; the very reason for mankind's continued production will have vanished. Perhaps we should be greatly relieved, then, that he restrained himself from ever speaking again in this singular voice.
I notice a flash in the corner of the study; something bolts for the window. It is the last one open, and I am at it within seconds. I slam it down hard, but it is too late. Down the path I see a shimmer, and I can just make out the faint outline of Norman Mailer, bounding away and grinning.
Nope, Still Not Socialism
I recently added myself to the ranks of those pointing out that Bernie Sanders, despite calling himself a socialist, is not voicing socialist principles. Socialism is antagonistic to capitalism, whereas Bernie Sanders believes in a regulated form of capitalism on the Nordic model. I am one among many to make this point, though I also forcefully insisted that this means Bernie Sanders must either be unaware of the definition of socialism or lying about it.
Now, the liberal Columbia historian Eric Foner has written an article in The Nation, in which he offers Bernie Sanders some advice as to how to talk about socialism. Ostensibly, Foner agrees with Sanders's socialist critics, saying that when Bernie Sanders defines "democratic socialism," he should not simply say the word "Sweden" over and over, but should look to the tradition of real American radicals such as the Indiana socialist Eugene V. Debs. Foner points out that we have a long tradition of uncompromising left-wing politics in America, from Tom Paine to the abolitionist movement to the Populism of the early 20th Century.
But, oh dear: even though he is ostensibly encouraging Sanders to embrace actual socialists, when Foner goes to define it he literally uses the Sanders definition, in which socialism is a more egalitarian form of capitalism. Here's what Foner says:
As to socialism, the term today refers not to a blueprint for a future society but to the need to rein in the excesses of capitalism, evident all around us, to empower ordinary people in a political system verging on plutocracy, and to develop policies that make opportunity real for the millions of Americans for whom it is not. This is what it meant in the days of Eugene V. Debs, the great labor leader and Socialist candidate for president who won almost a million votes in 1912. Debs spoke the language of what he called "political equality and economic freedom." But equally important, as Debs emphasized, socialism is as much a moral idea as an economic one—the conviction that vast inequalities of wealth, power, and opportunity are simply wrong and that ordinary people, using political power, can produce far-reaching change. It was Debs's moral fervor as much as his specific program that made him beloved by millions of Americans.
Now, here's the sort of rhetoric that Bernie Sanders uses already:
If we are honest in striving to be a moral and just society, it is imperative that we have the courage to stand with the poor, to stand with working people and when necessary, take on very powerful and wealthy people whose greed, in my view, is doing this country enormous harm." – from speech at Liberty University
Today, we live in the richest country in the history of the world, but that reality means little because much of that wealth is controlled by a tiny handful of individuals. The issue of wealth and income inequality is the great moral issue of our time, it is the great economic issue of our time, and it is the great political issue of our time. – from BernieSanders.com
It's already exactly the sort of thing Foner is suggesting; it's virtually indistinguishable. So Foner is not in fact asking Sanders to newly embrace the beliefs of the great American radicals. In fact, literally all Foner is asking for is more references to William Jennings Bryan instead of Norway. It's just pure nationalism; Foner is not suggesting a more uncompromsing set of principles, but simply giving practical political advice. Foner thinks it's good strategy to draw on American figures, since American politicians should be wary about praising Scandanavia, due to the longstanding national suspicion that everything European is vaguely bland and effete.
Lest anyone be snookered into thinking Foner is correct in viewing Eugene Debs as somehow sharing Sanders's view of socialism as a friendlier form of capitalism, let me now call to the stand: Mr. Eugene V. Debs, who administered a ruthless thrashing to the Foners/Sanderses of his own time:
These people, mostly honest, imagine themselves Socialists — that is, in a mild, not a malignant form. They have decided that there is no class struggle, and now they propose to determine whether or not to organize a new party — that is to say, whether or not capitalism will abolish itself. If a new party should be decided upon, it must not be partisan. Can any sane person conceive of such a monstrosity? Think of the wolf and the lamb in loving embrace, the fox and the pullet dancing a two-step and the lion and the ox scouting the class-conscious doctrine over peaches and cream, while the ass mused, "I have long been waiting for this party of 'all the people.'" Socialism was born of the class antagonisms of capitalist society, without which it would never have been heard of; and in the present state of its development it is a struggle of the working class to free themselves from their capitalist exploiters by wresting from them the tools with which modern work is done. This conflict for mastery of the tools is necessarily a class conflict. It can be nothing else, and only he is a Socialist who perceives clearly the nature of the struggle and takes his stand squarely and uncompromisingly with the working class in the struggle which can end only with the utter annihilation of the capitalist system and the total abolition of class rule. We count every one against us who is not with us and opposed to the capitalist class, especially those "reformers" of chicken hearts who are for everybody, especially themselves, and against nobody. While I believe that most of these "reformers" are honest and well-meaning, I know that some of them, by no means inconspicuous, are charlatans and frauds. They are the representatives of middle class interests, and the shrewd old politicians of the capitalist parties are not slow to perceive and take advantage of their influence. They are "Socialists" for no other purpose than to emasculate Socialism. Beaten in the capitalist game by better shufflers, dealers, and players, they have turned "reformers" and are playing that for what there is in it. They were failures as preaches and lawyers and politicians and capitalists. In their new role as "reformers" they dare not offend the capitalist exploiters, for their revenue depends upon their treason to the exploited slaves over whom they mourn dolefully and shed crocodile tears. I respect the honest effort of any man or set of men, however misguided, to better social conditions, but I have no patience with the frauds and quacks who wear the masks of meekness and in the name of "brotherhood" betray their trusting victims to the class that robs them without pity and riots in the proceeds without shame.
Is it worth my pointing out that by portraying Debs as a mere "opponent of inequality" and supporter of "political equality and economic freedom," Foner is abrogating his duty as a historian? That when he says a gentle respect for equality "is what [socialism] meant in the days of Eugene V. Debs" he is telling a massive fib? That he is almost certainly distorting the historical record of Debs's views because doing so will advance Foner's own liberal political beliefs? Is it worth pointing out the unbelievable irony of him attempting to use Debs's legacy to further precisely the kind of reformist politics that Debs himself explicitly denounced in the strongest possible terms?
Let me conclude with some true statements, amid this thicket of confusion over socialism that liberals seem to be exerting considerable effort to create. Eugene V. Debs was a socialist. Socialism means an end to capitalism. Bernie Sanders does not want to end capitalism. Bernie Sanders is not a socialist. Eric Foner does not want to end capitalism. Eric Foner is not a socialist. Eric Foner either doesn't understand Eugene V. Debs, or is intentionally downplaying Debs's radicalism for political purposes. And the most incontrovertible fact of all: with every additional sentence Eric Foner writes about Eugene V. Debs, Debs rotates in his grave with ever-increasing velocity.
The Dumbest Email I Have Ever Received
For some reason, when you have a blog, strangers often send you emails to argue with you. (Predictably, every single one of these strangers is male. Also, if you do not reply to these emails, the strangers sometimes send follow-up emails chastising you for your rudeness.) Many of these make me grumpy, if only because the strangers instantly launch into the harangue and never try to introduce themselves or offer to meet for lunch. But sometimes I am glad to receive them, such as when I receive a piece of correspondence of such breathtaking idiocy that it can provide me with a source of self-satisfied mirth for the entire rest of the day.
Two days ago, the amusingness reached a new all-time high, with an email from a man who described himself as an "Objectivist" (Uh-oh.) Our correspondent took issue with an argument I made about capitalism and individualism, in which I recommended providing a universal basic income, so that the creative geniuses (such as Prof. Longhair, Buddy Holly, and Brian Wilson) who have had to compromise their art for financial reasons would be free to more fully carry out their visions.
Our objectivist, however, not only disapproved of requiring a basic income, but said that:
This is quite literally slavery. You are advocating for the literal enslavement of those who are judged non-geniuses, in order that the material needs of geniuses be provided for.
Naturally, this puzzled me, since I did not remember coming out in favor of enslavement in the post. But I double-checked to make sure. Sure enough, all I had said was that we ought to provide everyone with a basic income. It was thus easy enough to reply to my objectivist friend, through the clever two-part argument "(1) No, it isnt. (2) No, I'm not."
Surprisingly enough, he did not feel his position to be devastated. He emailed me again (they always do) and clarified that the reason I was advocating slavery was that I was advocating something that would be funded by compulsory taxation, and:
If you're talking about *compulsory* taxation then yes, you're talking about enforced slavery. The essence of slavery is that someone is forced to work without profit to themselves – it matters not whether you appropriate the fruits of their labour beforehand, or afterwards.
Now, one preliminary point is that I didn't speak of compulsory taxation, for the simple reason that I think people should help each other out voluntarily; my preferred plan is for the rich to all realize they are monsters and surrender their wealth so it can be put to good use.
But look at this argument! Look at it! Every single tax is morally indistinguishable from slavery. Thus nearly everyone in the United States, and around the world, is presently enslaved. It's not my basic income proposal that's slavery, it's literally anything ever funded by taxes.
By the way, just so we're clear where the flaw is here: when you are enslaved, you can be punished or killed for not working. When you are taxed, nobody punishes or kills you for not working. Crucial distinction. My correspondent says this is meaningless, because everyone has to work in order to live, so taxes are unavoidable. This is hilarious, because my basic income proposal is precisely so that they don't have to work in order to live. Thus, as my correspondent implicitly acknowledges, capitalism is slavery, because only under capitalism must we work or die.
Now, look, it's not worth paying even a second's more attention to the argument here. As I say, this really is the dumbest email I have ever received. But it's worth examining as a documentary exhibit of one of the most dangerous tendencies in libertarian thinking: the belief that property and personhood are the same thing. A lot of free-market libertarians insist that one's property is an extension of one's self, and that to harm someone's property is tantamount to harming them. But see where this leads you. It leads you to believing that filling out your tax returns is exactly the same being mercilessly whipped every day of your life by an overseer. This kind of thinking makes me furious, because of the way it trivializes what slavery actually is. Slavery is a condition in which the individual's body is in the complete control of others. One has no freedom of movement, no access to knowledge, and is the subject of relentless violence. Let's remember that being a slave meant being beaten, burned, and murdered. That it meant toiling in brutal heat for the entire duration of your life, and it meant total subjection to the will of someone who despised you and thought you an animal. That it meant having your children seized and sold, having your spouse raped, or being raped yourself.
So when free market types make these fatuous arguments about how giving up a percentage of their income so that poor people can have health care is slavery, let's make sure they are treated with the disgust they deserve. Making this argument is equivalent to Holocaust denial; by trivializing the brutality of slavery, and comparing to the condition of 21st-century rich white men, it falsifies history and absolves an unforgivable crime. Anyone who dares to make this argument, which is false, offensive, and poisonous, should be treated with the same degree of credibility as Ernst Zundel or Robert Faurisson. If you argue that taxes are slavery, you are lying about what slavery is. Libertarians should be extremely worried that a position morally tantamount to Holocaust denial is alive and well in their communities.
Why I Am Not The Khmer Rouge
Recently I wrote an article abstract on the Social Science Research Network that people rather liked. The paper, which as of right now does not exist (to the disappointment of the many people who emailed me asking for a PDF) is entitled "Can Philosophy Be Justified In A Time Of Crisis?" and is summarized as follows:
In this paper, I take the position that a large portion of contemporary academic work is an appalling waste of human intelligence that cannot be justified under any mainstream normative ethics. Part I builds a four-step argument for why this is the case, while Part II responds to arguments for the contrary position offered in Cass Sunstein's "In Defense of Law Reviews." First, in Part I(A), I make the case that there is a large crisis of suffering in the world today. (Part I does not take me very long.) In Part I(B), I assess various theories of "the role of the intellectual," concluding that the only role for the intellectual is for the intellectual to cease to exist. In Part I(C), I assess the contemporary state of the academy, showing that, contrary to the theory advanced in Part I(B), many intellectuals insist on continuing to exist. In Part I(D), I propose a new path forward, whereby present-day intellectuals take on a useful social function by spreading truths that help to alleviate the crisis of suffering outlined in Part I(A).
This managed to attract the attention of Charles Murray (of Bell Curve infamy), who called it "the best academic abstract I have read in years" though said he suspected the full paper was "leftist pap." One interesting aspect of the Murray response is that nothing in the abstract advocates or suggests any kind of leftist politics, other than the suggestion that human beings ought to oppose the existence of suffering. And if the contemporary right believes "suffering is bad" to be some kind of soupy left-wing precept, this doesn't do much to undermine the left's view that conservatism is a philosophy of unqualified pitiless evil.
One response to the abstract I found surprising was the allegation that my thesis paralled the fundamental beliefs of Pol Pot. This was mentioned on Twitter and in some online comments. The Khmer Rouge were known for the mass extermination of all perceived "intellectuals," eventually taking it to the extreme of murdering anyone wearing glasses. (With certain exceptions, of course; Pol Pot had been known to occasionally sport a pair of spectacles.) But despite the infamous Khmer contempt for intellectualism, the comparison did rather surprise me. Is it worth pointing out the difference between responding to a problem by advocating self-improvement and responding to a problem by exterminating everybody involved? Evidently it is. Stalin and I could both think Russia needs industrializing, but the difference between his plan for getting it done and my own would be several million corpses.
Perhaps, though, it is worth heeding the caution. Anti-intellectualism is just prejudice against nerds. The problem with the Khmers was not just their bloody policy solution, but their hatred of professors to begin with. Perhaps. But I think there's hating professors, and there's hating professors. The Khmers viewed all learning with suspicion; they were at wore with knowledge itself. I, on the other hand, love knowledge, and think the academy is largely its enemy. I don't want to eliminate learning, what I want to eliminate is intellectualism, i.e. useless pontificating. I believe that if knowledge is not put toward a purpose, then it's no more valuable than my counting the number of bubbles on a piece of bubble wrap.
This was missed, not just by the the "Pol Pot"-shouting nutcases but by a lot of the abstract's viewers, that I was attempting to reorient the pursuit of knowledge rather than getting rid of it. A lot of people said "Why did you write this paper if you hate academic papers?" (And I did make a couple of self-deprecating jokes about that supposed irony myself.) But those people didn't read what I wrote; there was no irony or hypocrisy. I advocated that knowledge should be made with "useful social functions" in mind, oriented toward the relief of suffering. So if I believe that by writing something exhorting my colleagues to start being useful, I will be improving our chances of reducing suffering, then I am clearly justified in writing the paper even under my own theory. Of course, people thought that by saying intellectuals should cease to exist I meant scholars should cease to exist, but this precisely proves the point that they are incapable of imagining a world in which scholarship is not mere intellectualism, and they cannot disentangle wisdom from intellectualism.
Nobody Believes In The Rule of Law
October 1, 2015 November 4, 2015 / Nathan J. Robinson
For some time, all sorts of people have professed to believe in something called "the rule of law." They mean different things by this; some refer merely to the equal application of the law to all people, others believe that this principle means even unjust laws must be enforced. But the concept of the "rule of law" came to life vividly recently, when a Kentucky court clerk defied the Supreme Court's requirement that marriages be issued to same-sex couples. For this, she was given some time in jail for contempt of court, as well as a meeting with the Pope.
When this happened, many liberals (who do not agree with this clerk about same-sex marriage) began to justify the clerk's jailing on the grounds that she had violated the law, specifically her oath of office. At Esquire, Charles Pierce talked about the importance of oaths, and Noah Feldman did the same at Bloomberg View. This made many conservatives rightly guffaw, noting that they had never heard liberals praise uncompromising enforcement of the law (and imprisonment!) before that moment.
These conservatives were correct. Liberals wanted to see the clerk jailed because she was standing in the way of same-sex marriage, which they believe people are morally entitled to. But nobody really believes in the "rule of law" or the unbreakable sanctity of oaths. As the conservatives pointed out, liberals are perfectly okay with the violation of laws when it comes to sanctuary cities defying federal immigration laws. (Jonathan Adler of the Washington Post desperately insisted there was a difference, saying that under the Constitution, the federal government cannot require local governments to enforce federal law. But Adler should answer the question of, if the Constituion did require local governments to follow federal law, he would then believe San Francisco completely wrong in refusing to chuck immigrants out.)
Nobody believes in the rule of law absolutely. Or, at least, hardly anybody does. Nobody would believe that the Nuremberg Laws, assuming they were lawfully imposed, should be enforced. There is always a scenario in which people can imagine justifying civil disobedience (if a law was passed requiring me to murder my best friend, everyone who professes a belief in the rule of law would also come up with an explanation for why it was acceptable to refuse.) Okay, but what about oaths? When the clerk defied her oath to uphold the law, veryone on the left suddenly started issuing sanctimonious paens to the inviolability of the great Oath Of Office. Those who defy their oaths belong in jail.
For people like Noah Feldman, this is not an especially unforgiving principle, since one can always resign rather than uphold the oath. If you stay, you've got to abide by your oath; if you don't want to enforce the laws, you don't belong in a job where you have to enforce the laws.
But again, let's see if that principle always holds. Say I am a judge in a dystopian state. A law is passed saying that, due to the state's ongoing difficulties in stemming population growth, all orphans are to be collected and disposed of. As a judge, it is my job to enforce this law; orphans are brought before me, my job is to find them guilty of remaining alive in violation of the law (which they are), and to order their death sentences.
Or at least, that is my "job" as far as the letter of the law goes. In reality, I know that I could perfectly well get away with setting the orphans free and pretending they never came into my courtroom. This would be in complete violation of my oath, since the law explicitly says I cannot do this, and I have sworn to uphold the law. But I could do it, and I could save the lives of many orphans.
Now, I'm sure Noah Feldman and Charles Pierce do not believe I should order the orphans killed. (In fact, I asked Prof. Feldman whether he agreed with Justice Antonin Scalia's position that judges who oppose the death penalty should resign. Prof. Feldman said that he did, if they felt that carrying out the law would fundamentally conflict with their moral principles.) The question, then, is whether I am duty-bound to resign (and simply let someone else send the orphans to their deaths instead of me), or whether I should defy my oath and save the orphans.
I am actually not sure how many people would say I should resign. But I think that resignation, in this instance, is clearly an immoral alternative; the consequences of my act are no different than if I had given the death sentences myself, and I'm refusing to stop a series of murders that I could easily have prevented at no cost to myself, all because I feel wedded to the oath. My hypothesis is that in the extreme case, most people would agree with me. A judge in Nazi Germany, if they know they can save Jews, should save Jews. Their oath is trivial when set against this harm.
But if it's true that we all mostly agree that there are circumstances in which a law could be so brutal and unjust that one would be justified in defying one's oath of office in order to mitigate its unjust consequences, the whole rule of law edifice has collapsed. Because now it's just about drawing a line between when an issue is so important that the oath doesn't matter, and when it isn't. And it's because liberals think same-sex marriage is a good thing that they believe the oath takes priority, not because they think an oath must always be upheld no matter what.
Now, I agree that the clerk should have given the same-sex marriage licenses. But my view has nothing whatsoever to do with the "rule of law" and the oath of office; I simply believe that the clerk is homophobic, and that discrimination against gay people is wrong and therefore should not be done. And I believe that in order to keep discrimination against gay people from happening, a state is sometimes justified in using force (although I would suggest that other alternatives be tried first.)
But I will never say that I believe the clerk's job was to uphold her oath. That's because I know there are circumstances where I would feel justified in defying an oath of office in order to avert a heinous consequence. And if I believe that, then I cannot have an absolute insistence on oaths; I must measure whether the reason for defying the oath is itself a morally sound one. Liberals don't believe the clerk's reason fit in that category, but that is a substantive moral determination rather than a procedural one. Defying an oath is wrong, if one is defying it in order to discriminate against gay people. Defying an oath is not wrong, if one is defying it in order to save a life. ("But," I hear the critic squeal, "there is a difference between the justice of disobeying and the justice of punishing the disobeyer. It was nevertheless just to punish the clerk, regardless of the morality behind the defiance. Alright. But you'd better not be queasy at all about MLK; I want to hear you say "It was just to imprison Martin Luther King for parading without a permit." And if you come up with some reason why that law wasn't legitimate to begin with, you'd still better be fine with taking the principle to its extreme. "It would be just for Stalin to execute a judge who refused to carry out a purge, if the law required this punishment." And if you are unwilling to say this, a distinction must be drawn as to why the enforcement is just in the one instance and unjust in the other.)
Nathan J. Robinson
"So You're Saying That We Should…"
Current Affairs!
Watching Liberalism Flail
Prof. Eugene Volokh Is a Violent Sadist Who Fantasizes About Torturing People
Dream Diary: "Grapes"

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Drake Is "Disgusted" With Rolling Stone After They Gave His Cover To Philip Seymour Hoffman
By Joanna Robinson
David Becker/Getty Images
Drake may need to have his Twitter privileges revoked. The actor-turned-musician hopped online this morning to lambast Rolling Stone for misquoting him about Kanye West and for a last minute switch that gave his cover story to the late Philip Seymour Hoffman.
It's possible that Drake's "disgust" is directed at the misquotation rather than the cover swap, but the phrasing is unfortunate to say the least. As for the misquote, Drake is referring to a comment on West's album Yeezus that's circulating from some leaked scans of his interview. According to the magazine, Drake said, "There were some real questionable bars on there. Like that 'Swaghili' line? Come on, man. Even Fabolous wouldn't say some shit like that" before adding, "Kanye's the reason I'm here, I love everything about that guy." Can we believe Drake that the magazine invented a quote out of thin air or is this some kind of frantic backpedal? After all, this is the same interview where Drake brashly called Grammy-winner Macklemore "wack as fuck." But offending Macklemore is one thing, stepping on king Kanye's train is far more controversial. This wouldn't be the first time Drake pushed back on West. Rolling Stone makes a point to quote earlier Drake lyrics that were targeted at Kanye and Jay-Z's Watch The Throne album. "I'm just feeling like the throne is for the taking. Watch me take it!"
As for the Hoffman comment, once again it's easy to be misunderstood when you're trying to cram too many thoughts into 140 characters. It would be wiser for Drake to watch his words a little more closely, especially around such a sensitive topic. The confusion over his use of "disgusted" is particularly interesting considering Drake's departing tweet. According to the rapper, he's done with the media after this incident.
Right, because no one ever misinterpreted a tweet! You'll have to catch Drake's last ever interview on newsstands this Friday.


The nationwide launch of the Open Electricity Market (OEM) is progressing well. More than 700,000 consumers in zones 1 and 2 can now choose from more electricity retailers and enjoy competitive pricing and innovative offers at the same reliable electricity supply.
2 Based on the switch rates in the first month of each zone, Zone 2 has seen higher early switch rates than for Zone 1 and the soft launch in Jurong. The table below shows the overall switch rates of household consumers as of end-Jan 2019. These switch rates are higher than the single-digit first-year switch rates seen in other countries such as Japan, UK, Australia and New Zealand.
4 Consumers who have switched pay an electricity rate of about 20% to 30% lower than the regulated tariff. Retailers are offering rates ranging from 17.66 cents/kWh to 23.01 cents/kWh for their Fixed Price Plans and discounts ranging from 14.5% to 25% for their Discount Off the Regulated Tariff Plans.
5 The majority of households who switched signed up for 24-month Standard Price Plans, which offer all-inclusive rates. Between the two Standard Price Plans, the Fixed Price Plan has seen a higher take-up than the Discount Off the Regulated Tariff Plan.
a. 96% of residents have heard of this initiative.
b. Three out of four residents have taken some action after hearing about the OEM. This includes seeking information online and discussing the OEM with friends and families.
c. Half of the residents indicated that they are open to switching to a retailer.
7 Survey findings also showed that while consumers hope to see lower electricity bills, they also want more flexible pricing plans that cater to their needs. Some retailers have partnered with third-parties such as banks, telecommunications and home insurance companies to offer value-added services and products. In addition, the majority of retailers have gone digital and sign-ups can be done online.
8 EMA and retailers have been engaging and educating consumers to help them better understand their options. To date, EMA has conducted close to 10 community events, including a roadshow with retailers in December 2018. Retailers have also held roadshows at various community spaces, such as shopping malls and heartland areas.
 Correct as of 4 Feb 2019. Visit compare.openelectricitymarket.sg for the latest retailers' rates for their Standard Price Plans (i.e. Fixed Price Plan and Discount Off the Regulated Tariff Plan).
 All-inclusive rates do not have additional or hidden charges.


text:
Q: How set UIPickerView in cascade I'm trying to set two UIPickerViews, both are filled with NSDictionary, this work ok, but I need to the second UIPickerView implement a refresh depends of the selection of the first UIPickerView, understand me?
The first UIPickerView is filled this way:
for (NSDictionary *local in json) {
    NSString *nombre = [local objectForKey:@"name"];
    NSString *idLocal = [local objectForKey:@"id"];

    self.dicLocales = [NSDictionary dictionaryWithObjectsAndKeys: idLocal, @"idLocal", nombre, @"nombreLocal", nil];
    [listaLocales addObject:self.dicLocales];
}

And the second UIPickerView is filled this way:
for (NSDictionary *servicio in json) {
    NSString *nombre = [servicio objectForKey:@"name"];
    NSString *idServicio = [servicio objectForKey:@"id"];

    self.dicServicios = [NSDictionary dictionaryWithObjectsAndKeys: idServicio, @"idServicio", nombre, @"nombreServicio", idLocal, @"idLocal", nil];
    [listaServicios1 addObject:self.dicServicios];
}

You note  variable idLocal, that corresponds to id of the first UIPickerView rows. Then, I need, if in the first UIPickerView is selected row with idLocal 1, in the second UIPickerView is reloaded or refreshing only with rows corresponds to idLocal 1.
Please hope somebody can help me, and sorry for my English :P

A: you have to implement <UIPickerViewDelegate> Method as below
- (void)pickerView:(UIPickerView *)pickerView didSelectRow:(NSInteger)row inComponent:(NSInteger)component
{
    if ([pickerView isEqual:FirstPickerView]) {
        //SecondPickerView fill code
        [SecondPickerView reloadAllComponents];
    }
    else {
        //SecondPickerView Selected row
    }
}

and change your second UIPickerView fill Loop accordingly

A: I would recommend using (NSInteger)component   0 is the first row and so on.
if (component == 0) {
    if (row == 0) {

    }
    else if (row == 1)
    {

    }
}
else if (component == 1)
{
    selectedPositionIndex = row;
    if (row == 0) {

    }
    else if (row == 1)
    {

    }
    else if (row == 2)
    {

    }
    else if (row == 3)
    {

    }
}

This code works for just about all the picker view methods that provide the component NSInteger.
-(UIView *)pickerView:(UIPickerView *)pickerView viewForRow:(NSInteger)row forComponent:(NSInteger)component reusingView:(UIView *)view

- (void)pickerView:(UIPickerView *)pickerView didSelectRow:(NSInteger)row inComponent:(NSInteger)component

You will need to make sure you return the right item count for each component
-(NSInteger)pickerView:(UIPickerView *)pickerView numberOfRowsInComponent:(NSInteger)component
{
if (component == 0) {
    return wordArray.count;
}
else if (component == 1)
{
    return positionArray.count;
}
return 0;
}

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


Asus E502MA Drivers Download - Asus E502MA EeeBook includes the selection of Intel Bay Trail-M cpu (Celeron N2840, Celeron N2940, or Pentium N3540). The Celeron N2840 is a dual-core cpu clocked at 2.16 GHz. It helps Burst technology up to 2.58 GHz. The Celeron N2940 is a quad-core processor chip with basics frequency of just one 1.83 GHz and maximum Burst occurrence of 2.25 GHz. The Asus EeeBook E502MA happens with a 15.6-inches HD LED Backlit Slim Glare display which gives sharp viewing experience. It really is encased in a milky white body that includes a weight of just one 1.8kg and a width of 22.1mm.
Asus E502MA is in conjunction with a meagre 2GB DDR3 RAM. The included Intel HD 4000 GPU will take the duty of controlling game titles and videos. It works on the 64-bit Windows 8.1 OS. The Asus E502MA activities a cam which are designed for video cell phone calls. The 500GB SATA hard disk drive provides sufficient space for storage for storing sufficient files. It offers HD Music Solution speakers focusing on Sonic Get good at technology.
The Asus EeeBook E502MA is straightforward on your pocket and has features for solving basic processing needs. The occurrence of Windows Operating-system is a benefit in this cost range. Being lightweight, it can certainly be tagged along from location to place. It also provides all ports you need including a combo music jack, a VGA port, a USB 3.0 slot, a USB 2.0 slot, an HDMI dock, and and RJ45 LAN interface. Full-size chiclet computer keyboard with 1.6mm key travel on EeeBook E502MA makes typing convenient. A touchpad with SmartGesture support offers great detail just like a smartphone touchscreen. we provide download link for Asus E502MA Drivers. you can download for windows 8.1 64bit and windows 10 64bit.


février 28, 2012 : Tonight, you will have the opportunity to see no less than 5 TweetWalls on television. Watch the show The Voice Belgique on the RTBF or online.
février 28, 2012 : Want to tweet about The Voice Belgique but don't know how to do it? We give you a short guide to maximize your tweets and have a chance to see them on the TweetWalls tonight.
février 4, 2012 : The Midem was such an experience ! We met and listened to many interesting people and saw a lot of TweetWalls in action. Now we'd like to share every piece of this weekend with you.


Hire myDropWizard as your support department. Spend more time creating awesome things.
Focus on your next deadline, and we'll take care of your previous clients!
As a Drupal shop, agency or freelancer you're focused on delivering the next site or major feature by the deadline.
When a previous client has a problem, needs support or there's an important security update to apply, it can really interrupt your flow.
Let us act as your support department and take care of your previous clients on your behalf!
You want them to ask you when they need a new website or feature built. If they haven't heard from you since you delivered the project (months ago) they'll be more likely to go elsewhere when they need something new. And it's easier and cheaper to get a new project from an old client, than chasing new clients!
Worried you might not close the next big project in time to make payroll or cover expenses? Support and maintenance plans can help fill the gap.
We all know that websites require constant care and attention. By NOT providing it, you're ensuring that your clients WILL have problems with security or bugs down the road.
We act as your support and maintenance department.
We can setup an e-mail address like [email protected]YourDomain.com or special user in your ticket system (if your customers are used to interacting with you in this way) that goes to us.
When a request comes in, we'll determine if it's in scope for the support plan the customer has and the services we provide on that plan. If so, we take care of it and let the client know!
If they're asking for something out of scope, like new functionality they want added to their site, we'll forward that to you so that you can start a new (mini-)project with the client to implement that functionality!
If you have a particular development or deployment workflow, we're happy to follow it, so that our work doesn't conflict with the project work that your team is doing for the same client.
For more detailed information about how we do what we do, see the main "How it works?" section which is written for our direct customers, but all that information applies to how we'd work with your clients as well!
Contact us about providing white-label Support and Maintenance to your clients!
We bill you the same rates for our support plans as we do for our direct customers, and then you can bill your customer whatever you think is fair.
This means you could add a markup to account for establishing and maintaining the relationship with the client, or bundle additional services (like "continuous development") on top of our support and maintenance plans, and present it to the client as a single package.
How do I know you won't steal my clients?
We do only support and maintenance - we don't build new sites or implement new features.
We'll happily sign a non-compete agreement with you that specifically says we won't do project work for your client, and instead funnel anything that comes up back to you.


Hey Total Gym Team! After receiving popular results and positive feedback from the last meditation blog, I would like to expand on some more benefits and ways to build your own practice until it becomes a healthy, peaceful, daily habit.
To start, you should probably review my short meditation blog and accompanying video. In this post I will build on the methods of mindful mediation from in Part 1.
Most gurus recommend that you meditate first thing in the morning for this simple, practical reason: Meditation and calming the mind can be challenging, but training your mind to obey you just upon awakening eases that challenge. As soon as you open your email box, pick up your cell phone, or open the door to the world, the thinking mind is off and running. Telling the "thinker" who is in charge sets a great platform for your day. Ask yourself this: Are you in charge of your thoughts, or are your thoughts in charge of you?
The length of your meditations is a personal choice. I urge you to start with what feels good, I started with five minutes. In the beginning, five minutes seemed like five hours! I was always thinking I forgot to start my timer. But before long, my timer would go off and it felt comfortable. Soon I bumped my timer to seven minutes, then up to ten minutes, and so on. Just like exercise, consistency is the key. It's better to practice meditation for two minutes every morning rather than 30 minutes once a week.
Ritual is very powerful when trying to create a habit. Positive psychologist experts are now telling us that habits are much more powerful than will power. Find a place in your home that feels good and is peaceful. I have one client who uses her walk-in closet. It is the one place in her house away from the kids that feels quiet.
Increased Focus – In today's myriad of distractions, could this help you? Are you in control of your thoughts or are your thoughts controlling you?
Neuro-Plasticity – Since we now have the ability to take vivid pictures of the brain, we can see that meditation increases grey matter density, neural connections AND it protects your cognitive health.
Peace – Could you use a little more peace in life? If you give this a shot, I promise you that more and more peace will start to flow into your life.
This is a popular but tough question. Patience and consistency are key. To make another exercise comparison, you feel good after a workout but that doesn't mean you start to feel and see results right away – it may take a couple of weeks. The great news is the results and benefits just keep getting better the longer you stay consistent.
One thing I will guarantee you is this: if you try it and are consistent for a couple of months, you will notice a positive shift in your life. If you continue with it for the whole year, you will experience a huge transformation in your life. It is so hard to explain in written words so you can only know it by doing it yourself. It is like trying to explain true love to a teenager who has puppy love. You have to experience true love to know the difference from infatuation.
Enjoy the video and please contact me with any questions or comments. I cherish sharing the gift of meditation!


White Oak Presbyterian Church is a member of the ARP Synod. Founded in 1836, White Oak has been faithfully preserved by the Living God to be a faithful witness of the Gospel in this area. We are pleased to offer sermons on a new podcast system which is compatible with iPhones, iPads, and other popular mobile devices. Copies of the sermon are also available on CD upon request.
White Oak ARP is committed to glorifying God and enjoying Him forever. Toward this end, White Oak emphasizes meeting people's spiritual needs through accurate Biblical preaching and teaching from the Reformed perspective. To learn more about White Oak, please visit whiteoakarp.org.


I fully realize that the world does not need one more podcast.
Still, after spending a weekend in Hull, Massachusetts with my homie Justin Cohen this past March it seemed inevitable that we would take our meandering, incessant conversations to the next level.
Which brings me to The Beard Brothers Dope Show episode #1 (I'll let Mr. Cohen explain why half of the Beard Brothers is beardless). In this first podcast we talk about the many inquiries I've had from friends wondering if I've listened to those horrendous episodes about school integration on the podcast This American Life.
Not only have I listened to them, I also ended up on a panel with Nikole Hannah-Jones, the celebrated New York Times magazine writer and integration fundamentalist featured in the TAL series. On a panel made up of people educating black children in mostly non-white settings, she was the outlier of the group – and it showed. Most of the room was not feeling her overweening belief in school integration as the sole educational strategy for poor black children.
Luckily white America eats up her schtick. It gives Justin and me a lot to chew on.
DopeShow#1 from Citizen Stewart on Vimeo.


text:
Communique from the Anglican-Methodist International Commission for Unity in Mission - Ocho Rios, Jamaica 2013
The final meeting of the Anglican-Methodist International Commission for Unity in Mission (AMICUM) took place 22 February to 1 March 2013, in Ocho Rios, Jamaica, hosted by the Anglican Communion.
Communiqué from the meeting of ARCIC III in Hong Kong 2012
The Anglican-Roman Catholic International Commission has completed the second meeting of its new phase (ARCIC III), at the Mission to Seafarers in Kowloon, Hong Kong (3-10 May 2012).
Communique from the Anglican-Methodist International Commission for Unity in Mission - Maryland, USA 2012
The fourth meeting of the Anglican-Methodist International Commission for Unity in Mission (AMICUM) has taken place near Baltimore, Maryland, 10-16 February 2012
AOCICC - Anglican-Old Catholic International Co-ordinating Council November 2011 - Communiqué
The Anglican-Old Catholic International Co-ordinating Council (AOCICC) met in York, England from 4 to 8 November 2011.
Belonging together in Europe: A joint statement on aspects of ecclesiology and mission
The present paper is the fruit of six years work by the Anglican Old Catholic International Coordinating Council (AOCICC) in fulfilment of two aspects of the mandate given to the Council by the Archbishops of Canterbury and Utrecht:
The Anglican - Lutheran International Commission, Jerusalem 2011
The third Anglican–Lutheran International Commission (ALIC) held its sixth and final meeting in the holy city Jerusalem between 18 and 25 June 2011
Download 25 JUN 2011 39 KB
Communiqué from the Meeting of ARCIC III at Bose 2011
The Anglican - Roman Catholic International Commission has completed the first meeting of its new phase (ARCIC III) at the Monastery of Bose in northern Italy (May 17-27, 2011)
Communique from the Anglican-Methodist International Commission for Unity in Mission - Cape Town, South Africa 2011
Third Annual Meeting, Cape Town, South Africa 11–17 February 2011
The Anglican-Old Catholic International Co-ordinating Council (AOCICC) met in Schloss Beuggen, Germany from 8 to 12 November 2010.
ICAOTD Communiqué - September 2010,Oxford, United Kingdom
The International Commission for Anglican-Orthodox Theological Dialogue met in Oxford, from Tuesday 31 August to Tuesday 7 September 2010


text:
Actress Lashana Lynch Makes History As First Woman Cast As 007 In New 'James Bond' Movie
What Beyonce Whispered To Meghan Markle When They Met
Turns Out, 1 In 8 Men Think They Can Beat Serena Williams In A Game Of Tennis
Lea Michele Shares Moving Post In Honour Of Corey Monteith On The Anniversary Of His Death
Scarlett Johansson Claims She Has The Right To Play "Any Person" She Wants
Meghan Markle And Prince Harry Just Met Beyoncé And Jay Z
Megan Gale Shares The Best Advice Her Mum Ever Gave Her
"I Confronted My School Bullies"
Amanda Seyfried Slams Influencer For 'Glorifying An Unhealthy Body Image'
Cameron Boyce's Sister Shares Heartbreaking Letter On Instagram Following Star's Death
Miley Cyrus Reveals The Major Reason She Doesn't Want Children With Liam Hemsworth
Emma Watson's Beauty And The Beast Gamble Pays Off
'She has the world in the palm of her hand' - by marie claire
Earlier this week it was reported that Emma Watson reportedly earned $3 million for her portrayal of Belle in the live-action remake Beauty And The Beast. But in a brilliant move, the shrewd businesswoman also inked herself a deal which would see her make more depending on how much the film pulls in globally.
Initial reports said she stood to make an extra $15 million, but with the film absolutely smashing it at the box office, that figure has already surged to $19 million.
According to The Hollywood Reporter, the film has smashed a number of box office records including Top domestic opening of all time for a film rated PG, biggest debut of all time for a female-fueled film and it is the seventh best launch of all time for any movie.
RELATED: This Is Why Emma Watson Said No To 'La La Land'
emmawatson View Profile
@beautyandthebeast opens today! I hope you have as much fun watching it as I did making it. Love, Emma 
"I think she basically has the world in the palm of her hand," Liza Anderson, celebrity publicist and founder of Anderson Group Public Relations tells Fox News of Watson.
"She is the biggest star in the world right now. She can star in anything. She could produce. She's America's sweetheart and a global sweetheart."
"There's no denying that everyone looks to that success," adds Hollywood casting director Brett Benner.
"She's never been in want of work, but this will further diminish what she's known for — Harry Potter," he said. "I think she will command a higher salary and a lot more things will go to her that she can pick and choose from … This raises her star and it's more than most actors would dream of making in a lifetime."


Three of Sydney's premiere social establishments – the memorial of NSW, Carriageworks while the Museum of modern Art Australia – have established a major brand-new partnership to provide a single curated event throughout the three venues.
Linking three of Sydney's crucial cultural precincts – The Domain, Redfern and Circular Quay – The nationwide: brand new Australian art could be the just large-scale continual event in the town focused entirely on modern Australian art.
Over three versions in 2017, 2019 and 2021, The National will account a variety of emerging, mid-career and established music artists from around the country and practising overseas. New and recently commissioned works encompass a varied array of mediums, including artwork, movie, sculpture, set up, design and gratification.
Featured works on Gallery in 2017 feature Taloi Havini's multi-screen video installation Habitat, Tiger Yaltangki's artwork Doctor which and Alex Martinis Roe's new movie when you look at the series To becomes two.


Since childhood I have been found of drawing old monument or architecture buildings. Earlier my medium was oil on canvas but later on i started experimenting with pen & ink rendering on canvas with sepia colour ink which suits my old monument subject and people started appreciating my work very much . In 2010 October I held an exhibition at Jehangir art Gallery since then I have not looked back. Since childhood I have been found of drawing old monument or architecture buildings. Earlier my medium was oil on canvas but later on i started experimenting with pen & ink rendering on canvas with sepia colour ink which suits my old monument subject and people started appreciating my work very much . In 2010 October I held an exhibition at Jehangir art Gallery since then I have not looked back. Since childhood I have been found of drawing old monument or architecture buildings. Earlier my medium was oil on canvas but later on i started experimenting with pen & ink rendering on canvas with sepia colour ink which suits my old monument subject and people started appreciating my work very much . In 2010 October I held an exhibition at Jehangir art Gallery since then I have not looked back.


text:
EHR Data Allows Hospital To Find C. Diff Source
Here's a kind of story that makes you feel better about your EHR investment. A new journal article is reporting that researchers were able to find a source of Clostridium difficile within a hospital, not with elaborate big data analytics but simply by using basic EHR data.
According to the item, which appeared in JAMA Internal Medicine, a group of researchers examined EHR data on time and location to map roughly 435,000 patient location changes at the University of California San Francisco Medical Center. The effort was led by Russ Cucina, chief health information officer at UCSF.
After analyzing overall data, the researchers found a total of 1,152 cases of laboratory-documented CDI. The data indicated that CDI-positive patients moved through an average of four locations during their hospitalization, but that the CDI events came from a single location.
Researchers concluded that when patients were exposed to C. diff infections in the emergency department's CT scanner, it was associated with a 4% incidence of CDI. They also noted that the association between CT exposure and CDI was still significant even after adjusting other influences such as antibiotic use and patients' length of hospital stay. The association also remained significant when their sensitivity analysis extended the incubation period from 24 to 72 hours.
Having identified the CT as a potential vector of infection, the hospital next looked at how the that happened. It found that cleaning practices for the device didn't meet the standards set for other radiology suites, and took steps to address the problem.
While healthcare leaders will ultimately use EHR data to make broad process changes, addressing day-to-day problems that impact care is also valuable. After all, finding the source of CDI is no trivial manner.
For example, a study recently concluded that ambulatory care organizations can do a pretty good job of analyzing their workflow by using EHR timestamp data.
Researchers had developed the study, a write up of which appeared in the Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, to look at how such data be could be used in outpatient settings. Aware that many outpatient organizations don't have the resources to conduct workflow studies, the researchers looked for alternatives.
During the research process, the team began by studying the workflow at four outpatient ophthalmology clinics associated with the Oregon Health and Science University, timing each workflow step. They then mapped the EHR timestamps to the workflow timings to see how they compared.
As it turned out, the workflow times generated by analyzing EHR timestamps were within three minutes of observed times for more than 80% of the clinics' appointments. The study offers evidence that outpatient organizations can examine their workflow without spending a fortune, using data they already collect automatically.
Of course, hospitals will continue to do more in-depth workflow analyses using higher-end tools like big data analytics software. These efforts will provide a multidimensional picture that wouldn't be available using only timestamp analysis. But for hospitals and clinics with fewer resources, timestamp analysis may be a starting point for some useful research.
TagsAmbulatory Care Clostridium difficile EHR EHR Timestamp Data Electronic Health Record EMR EMR Timestamp Data Healthcare Healthcare Workflow Hospitals Infection Control JAMA Internal Medicine Russ Cucina University of California San Francisco Medical Center
Words That Drive Executive Recruiters Away
Patient Portal Use Rising Rapidly


text:
24 Hour Emergency Line
Submit Work Order
Jason Roblin
Chief Executive Officer, CPA
Jason Roblin, CPA was born and raised in Pierson, Manitoba before moving to Brandon in 1999 to obtain his Bachelor of Business Administration Degree from Brandon University. Jason then began his public accounting career with MNP LLP in 2004, where…
Jeff Temple
Jeff was born in Minnedosa and raised in Brandon. After graduating from Vincent Massey High School Jeff attended Brandon University. Jeff played 3 seasons in the western hockey league with the Brandon Wheat Kings and Medicine Hat Tigers, winning the league championship with…
Jonathan Kirkup
Controller, CPA CA
Jonathan joined VHP in the spring of 2017. Jonathan had been the controller at the Brandon Sun prior to joining VHP and has also worked with MNP LLP during his professional career. Jonathan and his wife Amber both enjoy living…
Katie McMillan
VP of Operations
Katie joined the Vionell Holdings team in March 2016. Her background in marketing, new home sales and property management made her a qualified candidate to manage the company's expanding condo portfolio. In early 2018, VHP was at a position where…
Michelle Salazar
Property Manager – Residential Portfolio
Michelle Salazar was born in Winnipeg, Manitoba and moved to Brandon with her Mother and older brother when she was 3 years old. Michelle attended Meadows Elementary, Vincent Massey High School and Assiniboine Community College, earning her Business Administration Diploma…
Shawn Sarkonak
Property Manager - Condominium & Commercial Portfolio
Bio coming soon...
Steve Paraschuk
Vp of Maintenance
Steve Paraschuk was born and raised in Regina SK. After obtaining his carpentry diploma from SIAST in 1989 he worked various construction jobs around Regina and Saskatoon. In fall of 1990 Steve made Brandon his home bringing the beginning to…
Alanna Rudniski
Born and raised in Brandon, Manitoba, Alanna has always had a strong connection with the Wheat City and knew she would never stray too far from the city she loved. After graduating from Crocus Plains Highschool in 2003, she eagerly…
Graham Hunt
Graham has worked in the construction field for over 35 years, he has experience with bathroom renovations, lawn sprinkler systems, drywall repairs, painting as well as small electrical and plumbing repairs.
Grant Munro
Grant was born in Brandon, Manitoba, he moved to Reston at the age of 7 where he completed schooling prior to moving to Calgary, Alberta where he lived and worked until returning to Brandon in 2010. While in Calgary, he…
Jamie Avery
Jamie grew up in Crystal City and graduated from Pilot Mound Collegiate in 2005. She moved to Brandon to attend ACC and joined the workforce soon after her move. Starting in retail management in the City, she was quickly relocated…
Jaskaran Kaur
Jaskaran, also known as Jas, was born and raised in Punjab, India. After completing her post-graduation and achieving a Masters of Commerce, Jas put her education to good use in India while working as an Assistant Professor in Commerce. After…
Justin Birin
Justin Birin was born and raised in Brandon, Manitoba. After graduating from Assiniboine Community College in 2012 with a diploma in Business Administration (Accounting specialization), he transferred his credits to Brandon University and began working towards a degree in business.…
Natasha McNeill
Natasha grew up in Hartney, Manitoba and moved to Brandon in 2001 after graduating high school. After completing her Business Administration Diploma at Assiniboine Community College, she continued to further her education by enrolling into Brandon University where she obtained…
Paige Shindela
Paige was born and raised in Minnedosa, Manitoba and moved to Brandon to attend Assiniboine Community College. She later graduated in 2017 with a Business Administration Diploma and continued to further her education by enrolling into Brandon University. Paige is…
Vern Forsyth
Born and raised here in Brandon, Vern headed west to obtain his journeyman status in carpentry. After a period of working he eventually headed back to the Wheat City. Vern put in 25 years with the Brandon School Division as…
Brandon Switzer (3rd Year Veteran)
VHP Lawncare Team
Emma Greenwood (3rd Year Veteran)
Ethan Guthrie (Rookie)
Jordy Stallard (Rookie)
Sam Huston (2nd Year Veteran)
Tyler Gibson (Rookie)
VIONELL HOLDINGS PARTNERSHIP
Unit A – 1340 10th Street
Brandon, Manitoba R7A 6Z3
Vionell Holdings Partnership is a licensed multi-family, condominium property management firm that has operations in Brandon, Portage la Prairie, and Thompson, Manitoba. Our team of professionals manage the properties by providing excellent service in the areas of leasing, maintenance, budgeting and financial reporting.
Copyright ©2016 Vionell Holdings Partnership. All rights reserved.


text:
Q: Registration form doesn't save addition field in database with Laravel Maybe is silly question but I have a problem with my registration form. I have added one addition field to be saved in database users table but this addition textarea value isn't saved.
All other inputs such as username, password are saved correctly. This is the addition textarea

      Bio

          <textarea class="form-control" name="bio" id="bio" rows="5"></textarea>

And the AuthController.php store function
protected function create(array $data)
{
    //dd($data);
    return User::create([
        'name' => $data['name'],
        'password' => bcrypt($data['password']),
        'bio' => $data['bio'],
    ]);
}

When I do dd($data) I see that the $data contain the Bio value.
Column bio is with type text in database so, is not truncated or something.
What can be the issue?

A: This is a Mass Assignment issue.
In your User model, you will have an array defined as public $fillable = [...];
You will need to add 'bio' to the array to allow it to work from the User::create([]); function

A: I your model add the bio in protected fillable.
Like this one.
protected $fillable = ['name','email','password','bio'];