text:
HomeEulogy and Obituary for Marcene Buchs
Eulogy and Obituary for Marcene Buchs
October 6, 2018 October 7, 2018 PastorPartridge EulogyEulogy, faith, family, followers of Jesus, Jesus Christ, life, love, Obituary, others
Eulogy for Marcene Buchs
My family and I moved to Alliance during the last week of June. And so, on Thursday of this week, when Mike and Amy asked me if I had even had a chance to meet Marcene, I honestly wasn't sure. Until I stared working on my remarks for today and pulled up her obituary and saw her photograph. But then I knew. I knew that I had met Marcene but hadn't yet had the chance to get to know her. But many others did. At church, Marcene was known to be a sweet lady who was always well put together. She was always dressed fashionably, not to in any way act as if she was better than anyone else, but simply because being impeccably dressed was important to her. She had flair. People noticed when Marcene entered a room. She was known, always, to be a classy lady as well as a person of deep and personal faith.
Marcene Buchs grew up taking care of her dad. And when she had done that then it was time to take care of her mom, and then it was her Aunt Ellen. She was a caregiver. It wasn't a life that she chose, but she accepted it as her responsibility. She grew up in Beechwood in a family of farmers. But she came to Christ United Methodist Church more than 60 years ago when her family moved to Alliance while she was in the fifth grade. She was both faithful and dedicated to our church and was sure to attend every week for as long as she was able.
Over the years, she worked as a secretary and kept the bills paid. She didn't have a fairy tale life by any stretch of the imagination, but she was known for her strength of character, she always took the high road, did things the "right way," and always did everything well and with excellence. Although she never felt sorry for herself, sometimes the events and the circumstances of her life led her to feel insecure. She lived in a small town, and she knew what people said about her, but that, and despite her insecurity, she refused to retreat, and forced herself to participate in the community.
Marcene was always "super-devoted" to her family and to her grandchildren. She didn't just care about what they did, she devoted herself to exploring, learning, and doing her very best to understand what they did whether it was sports, or music, or quilting, publishing, or rocket science. Marcene was a reader, and she had always read everything. But whenever she knew what her family or friends were interested in, she read about that too. Although she didn't have a CD player in her home, she did have one in her car. And so, in order to listen to her grandson Chase's CD's, she would get in her car and drive around town so that she could listen to them. As Mike and Amy went through her things, they discovered that Marcene had kept detailed records of her life and of her family's life. Events and projects that they had long forgotten, were carefully recorded and kept in her albums and notebooks.
Marcene Buchs was a minimalist who loved order. She owned a small number of outfits and when she bought a new one, an old one had to go. Nothing in her home was out of place. She appreciated order and she paid great attention to every detail. But Marcene's insistence on perfection only applied to herself. She was forgiving of others and understood that they were different than she was.
Perhaps the most obvious example of who Marcene was, is found in her son Mike. As the saying goes, "The apple doesn't fall far from the tree." And Mike didn't become the caring, considerate, intelligent, driven, and loving person that he is by accident. He is a living example of Marcene's influence on his life and a reflection of who she was.
Much of her life was devoted to caring for others and while was greatly loved by others, she loved them all right back. But, as I noted earlier, Marcene's faith was important to her. She made sure that Mike grew up in the church and passed her faith on to him. And when her grandchildren arrived, she invested herself in them so that they could learn it as well. As I talked to Mike and Amy, we knew that Marcene would not want this moment to pass without sharing her faith with you as well. Marcene Buchs put her full faith and trust in Jesus Christ as her savior. She believed that Jesus died for her sins so that she could, at this very moment, stand before God, forgiven, redeemed, and perfect. We know where Marcene will spend her eternity, and she wants every one of you to join her there when your day comes. If you don't know how to do that, Marcene's family and I urge you to talk to one of us afterward.
But of all of us, Mike knew her best of all. And so, although he knew that he wouldn't be able to stand up here today and share his thoughts, these are his words:
A Son's Reflections
by Michael Robert Johanson
We are gathered here together to honor and celebrate the life of my mother, Marcene Buchs. My mother was a throwback and maintained the sensibilities of another time always attempting to do the right thing optimistically even when it was not popular or easy. She was not deceived by the complexities in this world and was firmly rooted in the simplicities that are the foundation of our being. That is her message to us. She would have loved the flowers in the room today and would remind us all to enjoy the sight and scent. She would not want any of us to mourn today rather to channel the spirit she has put in all of us to live up to our potential, do the right things, listen, encourage, pick each other up when we fall have hope, faith and leave a positive mark on this world.
I have spent much time this week thinking of what should be said, attempting to properly honor my mom's memory or even partially convey the wonderful life my family and I were lucky enough to share with her. Should I list all of her accomplishments which were many? She was capable far beyond what we all saw – she had a mighty inner strength. Should I tell stories from the farm in Beachwood? Those would be funny particularly the "hammer story" (though probably still not funny to her brother my uncle Bob). Her happiness, optimism and vision of the future during her youth – she always did her very best? The energy and pride she always exemplified in the workforce? But all of this can be read in the newspaper this week. What isn't there is her devotion and love for her family. Her grandparents, aunts, uncles, cousins, brother and his family, taking care of her mother, father, and her son who were always steadfastly by her side and her by them. I came along not under ideal circumstances, but you would have never known it. Her devotion and love made my life ideal.
If she were planning today's service she would be playing videos in the hall of rockets launching things I've built into space. A spread of magazines that Amy had created that highlighted her handiwork that she was so overjoyed to see on a newsstand. She would play highlight reels of her grandson Noah throwing a football. She often went on long drives to listen to songs on the CD player of her grandson Chase that always lift her up and "made the sunshine come out". Those songs were played today prior to this service per her request and they meant the world to her. She was very proud of all of Chase's accomplishments. She would showcase her "superhero" grandson Ellis's many activities, performances, beautiful voice and intellect and also remark how she was able to get a little piece of her own son back through him. She would spent endless hours studying and learning about all our interests and made them her own. And while none of this would be about her. In her mind it was all about her, and it is.
I found a folder this week in her important papers titled Emotional Serenade. In this folder of poems and writings I got a chance to get inside my mom's spirit in ways I had not seen before. In her writings I think she described who she was far better than I ever could in the following poem:
THE CATALPA TREES ARE BLOOMING ON HAINES AVENUE
The Catalpas are blooming on Haines Avenue;
their snow-like blossoms are fresh and white and new.
They crown the branches of the stately trees
and cover the ground with a summer freeze.
In time, long green beans will appear,
hanging amidst the elephantine leaves part of the year.
This makes Haines different from Wright, Union or Summit,
indeed it is the very best part of it!
The red bricked street of a yesterday,
scene of a childhood summer of play.
I was fresh from the farm and an isolated life
thrust on a sidewalk of kids amidst workman and buses,
backyard cherry trees – neat houses and gardens,
flower bedecked porches, new shoes bought on an
afternoon trip downtown, birthday parties on the lawn,
bank tellers, clothiers, teachers, mailmen, executives
and retirees – a grocery store that smelled so right
with licorice cigars and other delights…
everything so lazy and forever. Now all gone mainly
BUT THE TREES
I had always known the infinite variety of trees;
all the magical appendages moving in the breeze;
their sudden brilliant hues burning even after the fade;
their wealth worth more than could ever be paid.
Yet I was amazed at the leaves on a hunt for my son
and ran around saying, in effect, "Here's one, here's one!"
Then it was the Ginkgo that mesmerized me,
but the Catalpas are a gift by the powers that be
and are for the moment what's happening on Haines.
They come to me, and the thrill never wanes.
My mother was always my unexpected messenger encouraging me (and all of us) to accomplish the impossible and she led by example in ways that I didn't always understand or comprehend. But eventually, I would always understand completely. While her life didn't always meet the expectations she perhaps had for herself, she made the best of every moment and worked tirelessly to make sure those around her had the best opportunities, were the best prepared, and when we needed a boost, she was there to lift us up. Though 620 Wright Ave was just a small dot on big planet she always encouraged me to be OPEN and ready to take on the world. She taught me that if I opened up my mind I could be and do anything. If I opened up my dreams the impossible became possible. If I opened up my heart I would always be surrounded by the very best people. If I opened up my eyes the path forward would always be clear. And if I opened my arms she would and will always be there.
In her notes this week she left me a final piece of advice in her Emotional Serenade folder. I'm not sure she wrote it but she typed it and put in a place so I would see it first. I think is a continuing message for all of us:
"People tend to look in each other's wallets instead of each other's eyes. You can't buy a look into someone's heart. Or a loving look. Or a smile. The retention of important memories is a gift beyond price. Memory is where the proof of life is stored. Unobstructed access to memories is both a sign of good health and a measure of true wealth. Money can't buy health and money can't buy hope."
I am thankful for the time that we have had on this Earth together, and her passing reminds me to value the time we all have with our loved ones. To allow our 'time' on this planet to walk with us rather than be our adversary and to cherish every moment, because they will never come again. What we leave behind is not as important as how we lived, and I know how much my mother loved this life and those of you who shared it with her. So those of us who knew her will understand when I say that her passing to me is truly only that state in which she exists within all of us whose lives she has touched, which is why today is not about an end. I know she lives on within me and my children and that too shall pass to my children's children. No good-byes mom, just wonderful memories. You will walk with me always. I will see you again.
-Michael Robert Johanson
Obituary for Marcene Mae Buchs
Marcene Mae Buchs, age 84, of Alliance, died September 27, 2018 in her home.
She was born March 7, 1934 in North Georgetown, Ohio, the daughter of William J. and Nettie F. (Stryffeler) Buchs.
Marcene lived in Alliance all her life, spending her early years on a farm in Beachwood. She graduated from Alliance High School where she was a majorette, and from the University of Mount Union, receiving an Associate's Degree in Secretarial Training. She was a 60-year member of the Xi Delta Sorority.
She retired from Cohen & Company Ltd., formerly Mather, Pfeifer and Potts, Inc., in 2004, after 27 years. She was previously employed as an administrative assistant and executive secretary for 10 years at United Co-op, Inc.
She was an active member of Christ United Methodist Church in Alliance for more than 60 years where she was involved in Threads of Love, the Prayer Shawl Group, taught Sunday school, served as secretary for the Administrative Council, member of the Stewardship and Finance and Worship committees, sang in the Chancel choir and directed the youth choir.
Throughout her life, she enjoyed tennis, golf, bowling, biking, knitting and reading.
Marcene will forever be an adored mother, grandmother, sister, niece and aunt whose strength and compassion throughout her life were an inspiration to everyone who knew her.
She is survived by a son, Michael R. (Amelia Stone) Johanson of Medina and a brother, Robert L. (Roberta) Buchs of Willoughby, three grandsons, Noah, Chase and Ellis Johanson, two nieces, Kristen Buchs of Sycamore and Tracy (Dr. Scott) Shell of Chagrin Falls, three grand nephews, Zachary, Cody and Matthew Shell and many cousins. She was preceded in death by her parents.
The family will receive friends from 10 to 11 a.m., Saturday, October 6, 2018 at Cassaday-Turkle-Christian Funeral Home. Funeral Services will begin at 11 a.m. with the Rev. John Partridge officiating. Interment will follow at Highland Memorial Park.
Memorial contributions can be made to the Christ United Methodist Church, 470 E. Broadway St., Alliance, Ohio 44601. Arrangements are by Cassaday-Turkle-Christian Funeral Home.
← Reversal of Fortune
God's Unwanted Gifts →


We are excited to post the Tournament Schedul for RCCC's clubs for the 2017 season. You can find a copy here, or you will also find a version under the "Newsletter" in the member portion of the website. As always we will include the events on the monthly calendar as well.


Since last week they have issued two updates to fix these bugs. In fact they released two new versions on Thursday (July 8) alone. Working late Thursday evening we noticed version 2.30.586 pop up on the WishList Member dashboard.
If you upgraded to release 2.3 then I recommend you update to this newest version soon. If you are using a version of release 2.20 and are happy with it, then there's no pressing reason to change at this time.
If we manage your site, then we have already made the change. The same for any current projects that are in progress.


text:
Claire Hailstone
Prime Minister by Claire Hailstone
1. Ministry of Justice, Ken Clarke. Responsibilities - •Oversight of all Ministry of Justice business •Criminal Justice and penal policy strategy •Constitutional issues •Judicial policy •Claims Management Regulation Unit •National security justice issues •EU and international
1.1. National Probation Service. Probabtion is support after prisons, stay out of crime, probation officers work with ex-criminals to support.
1.1.1. HM Inspectorate of Probation. Funded by Ministry of Defence, reports back to the justice minister, inspects youth offending terms, reducing re-offending, protecting the public.
1.2. Crispin Blunt, responsible for the national offender management service. 269,000 people in UK under punishment.
1.2.1. HM Prison Service. 137 prisons in the UK. 86,000 people in prison. Only 4,300 are women, 5% UK lock ups, most people out of all european countries - not necessarily lowest crime rate.
1.2.1.1. Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Prisons. Inspects prisons to prevent bullying and suicide etc.
2. Secretary of State for Health, Andrew Lanley. Andrew Lansley CBE MP is Secretary of State for Health and a member of two Cabinet Committees: National Security Council and the Home Affairs Committee.
2.1. Simon Burns, MP.Simon Burns is Minister of State for Health, his responsibilities include: Legislation, NHS Performance, Health Services, Reconfiguration of Services, Patient Safety, Application of Quality Regulation, NHS Workforce, Mixed Sex Accommodation and Connecting for Health.
2.1.1. NHS, 3 million employees. The NHS They are primarily funded through general taxation rather than requiring insurance payments. They provide a comprehensive range of health services, the vast majority of which are free at the point of use to residents of the United Kingdom.
2.1.1.1. Health Authority, Yorkshire and the Humber. Health authoritiescouncil works with local NHS to prioritise spending tailored to that area.
2.1.1.1.1. Healthcare Commission. The Healthcare Commission was a non-departmental public body sponsored by the Department of Health of the United Kingdom. It was set up to promote and drive improvement in the quality of health care and public health in England and Wales.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Very briefly: I hit this by accident. Some time ago there was an exchange of comments about whether VLC eating might function as a management for Glycogen Storage Disease type I, von Gierke's disease. I think the question was firmly, and possibly incorrectly, settled by mnature pointing out that raw cornstarch was THE answer. No choice. I realise GSD type III is not GSD type I, but many of the clinical signs are the same, especially hypoglycaemia. There is choice in type III.
The group have tried a high protein diet to provide hepatic glucose from gluconeogenesis, a mildly ketogeneic diet to AVOID providing exogenous glucose because it just drops in to a bottomless pit of stored glycogen and some synthetic ketones à la Veech to provide some glucose-independent ATP.
Just a case report, it worked. So far so good. Interesting.
PS The new blogger format. I hate it. Can you make the links live in preview????
OK, I've treated myself to a few hours at the blog.
If we look at Veech's 2011 paper we can see that he is driving towards a drug which induces ketosis, side stepping all of that starvation or very low carbohydrate eating normally required, outstripping octanoate for carbohydrate defying ketosis. You can even FIRKO-ise your mice without all that standing around on a hill top in mid winter. It would, essentially, allow all of the benefits of ketosis on metabolic efficiency while still consuming a diet of utter crap. That's not something which interests me terribly much, though I can completely see where he is coming from. It will do some good but probably do very little to influence the underlying progress of the disease.
We had friends of friends round to supper the other day. They were interested (as Veech is) in ketosis as a tool to try and modify the progress of Parkinson's disease. So we had a baked mushroom each, filled with bacon and melted soft cheese with a smidge of fried onions and a micro smidge of spinach then topped with half a round of goat cheese for starters, belly pork goulash with soured cream, broccoli and asparagus for main course and Optimal ice cream (minimal dose of honey, no sugar) with a few raspberries for desert. Coffee and double cream. Modest red wine portions. The funniest part was trying to explain to them that serious researchers/nutritionists genuinely explained away the reduced appetite on LC diets as being due to either boredom or lack of palatability.
Eeeh, the stuff people come up with. Personally, I think Veech should sack his chef. Or stop eating F3666 and hire a chef.
"The ketone levels are similar to those found in humans during prolonged fasting (33, 34) and are 3- to 5-fold higher than the levels reported for mice fed KG diets (13, 15)."
It's the last section of that quote that really made me sit up. Both ref 13 and ref 15 are sitting on my hard drive. They use F3666, 8.6% protein, 3.2% carbs and lots of fat. They found ketone levels of 1.3mmol/l and 1.6mmol/l.
That is amazing. Amazingly pathetic ketosis. Nine percent protein, minimal carbs, the rest fat. If you or I ate this diet for more than a few days we would be peeing brilliant purple on our Ketostix.
What is really special about this Veech study and the other two mouse ketosis papers is not what they tell us about how to get in to ketosis (or not), it's much more what they tell us about C57BL/6 mice. That's right, C57BL/6 mice.
These mice are very special.
I've long thought that these poor rodents behave, when fed a high fat diet, rather like MSG lesioned, ventromedial hypothalamic lesioned or gold thioglucose lesioned animals. Their VMH breaks. They develop neuronally mediated acute insulin hypersensitivity in their adipocytes, they then abnormally store fat at low levels of insulin, increase eating to compensate for this calorie loss in to adipocytes and eventually develop adipocyte distention induced insulin resistance, which shows as metabolic syndrome.
It is impossible to over emphasise how important these ketosis studies are to C57BL/6 mice. Especially if you happen to be a C57BL/6 mouse.
BUT let's pretend none of us is a C57BL/6 mouse, just imagine you are a Wistar rat on 11% protein added to your traditional diet of neat Crisco (Mmmmm, Crisco, yumeeee). You will be in to ketosis with a beta hydroxybutyrate at 4.8mmol/l, and probably develop another mmol/l of AcA, within days and stay there. Are humans more like C57BL/6 mice or Wistar rats? I have no doubt that a human can damage their VMH by the same process by which they become obese. I doubt very much that this has anything to do with eating fat. Sucrose is much more likely. But even if you are obese and have damaged your VMH while becoming obese, you can still get your BHB over 7mmol/l. It may take some time, or even a little water fasting, but you can do it.
BTW Crisco induced ketosis is neuroprotective although I'd personally rather do the same with butter!
If you are a human looking to manage Parkinsons you can quite easily get to 6mmol/l of ketones in your bloodstream. You are not a C57BL/6 mouse. You don't even need Crisco, selected Food will do it.
The massive benefit of a ketogenic diet over the "SAD spiked with ketone esters" approach is that ketogenic diets avoid hyperglycaemic episodes. If you think hyperglycaemia is good for neurons you are probably well in to some nasty neurodegenerative disease!
It's "a free lunch that you're paid to eat," in the words of Everett Shock.
My own light reading at the moment is this one, as a kid I thought tunnel diodes were cool.
Labels: FIRKO-isation without all the hassle?


Satguru Bodhinatha Veylanswami reads his editorial from the Jul/Aug/Sep 2017 edition of Hinduism Today magazine. "Individuals who are not religious make progress toward achieving their goals in life by self-effort. Whatever they accomplish is, from their perspective, solely the result of what they do to achieve it." In order to unfold spiritually, one must relinquish his free instinctive nature and surrender to God by performing dharma well, selfless service, worship, meditation, transforming one's character, resolving karmas through acceptance and study. Surrender is important for 3 types of yoga namely bhakti yoga, karma yoga and raja yoga.


text:
HR Tech Conference
HR Tech Conference news
HR Tech Virtual
Health & Benefits Leadership Conference
Health & Benefits Leadership Conference News
HR Tech Festival Asia
DEI strategy
DEI technology
Recruitment and sourcing
Retaining diverse talent
Benefits technology
Legislation and policy
Top 100 HR Tech Influencers
Work tech
Compliance and policy
Future-ready workforce
HRE experts
Insights from a CHRO
Remote/hybrid work
Reskilling/upskilling
6 ways we're getting diversity recruiting all wrong
By Jen Colletta
Jackye Clayton
Jackye Clayton cringes at the assertion that some people say they "don't see color" when it comes to race.
It's not just a naÁ¯ve way of tackling the many-layered problem of racial disparities–it can actually be an active way of avoiding it.
"For many people, pretending not to see or feel things is their way of protecting themselves," she said during an opening day keynote of Spring HR Tech (the free, virtual event runs through Friday; click HERE to register). It's a radical but dangerous form of self-care, she said–similar to arguments that gun violence isn't an epidemic, that climate change isn't real and that economic inequality is blown out of proportion.
But when it comes to how these issues play out in the real world–including in the workplace–being blind to the issues isn't an option any longer, she said.
"If you can pretend Black lives don't matter and that you don't see color, that means you can also pretend systemic racism doesn't exist–but it does," she said.
That way of thinking, Clayton noted, has led HR to go about building diverse workforces in all the wrong ways.
See also What's on tap for day 3 of Spring HR Tech?
When recruiting diverse talent, she said, HR and recruiters often search for those who "fit the culture." That's antithetical to fostering diversity–and HR leaders have to "stop kidding themselves" so they can recognize that.
"If we're truly committed to recruiting diverse candidates, we need to keep people whole and stop breaking them so they can become one of us," she said. "When they can keep themselves whole, that's when the magic happens."
Related: Read more Spring HR Tech coverage here.
To get to that point, however, employers need to abandon habits and processes that were likely decades in the making. Here are six common mistakes Clayton said organizations need to avoid if they want to build truly diverse and inclusive organizations:
Only looking for Black talent at HBCUs: Of the top 10 colleges and universities for Black student enrollment, only three are historically Black colleges and universities–so if an employer's diversity recruiting strategy centers only on HBCUs, it's leaving out more than 50,000 potential candidates. Ultimately, only 20% of Black students in the country who complete a bachelor's degree do so at an HBCU. "So, how are you recruiting the other 80%?" Clayton asked.
Emphasizing progressive experience: Job criteria that include phrases like "10 years of continuous leadership experience" are tone-deaf to the realities many marginalized employees face. For example, 90% of transgender individuals report having experienced harassment or mistreatment at work; how long should they stay at that job–and what opportunities for advancement might they really have if they're in a discriminatory environment–in order to secure a resume showcasing progressive experience?
Not targeting potential employees with disabilities: Clayton noted that 11% of post-secondary undergrads report having some sort of disability–but disability is often not counted among employers' diversity goals. "Don't overlook the often-overlooked," she said.
Starting diversity efforts with entry-level roles: On a recent webinar that was comprised of 90% cisgender males, Clayton said, one individual suggested the best way to increase diversity was to hire young women straight out of college to join the sales team–she joked that she wanted to call 911. That same person suggested diversity and bias training isn't crucial. "You have to make sure you have diverse leaders in order to hold subordinates accountable to diversity goals and to create a safe environment," she said.
Expecting technology to solve a problem that a lack of technology didn't create: While technology can be a vital tool to help attract and retain diverse talent, organizations can't leverage tech's true potential without getting to the heart of their own diversity problem first. "The problem in the organization in regard to bias didn't start when you started buying tech–it started when you started hiring people who were unaware of their own biases," she said.
Retaining problem employees: Clayton doesn't advocate for firing employees who don't know how to hire diverse talent; rather, organizations need to part ways with those who are "so afraid of losing their power and comfort that they would rather do what they've always done to keep what they think only belongs to them." The driving reason for a lack of diverse talent isn't an actual lack of diverse talent–it's that there are "too many racist, misogynistic, bigoted, sexist, homophobic, unaware people in leadership today," she asserted. Organizations that recognize that they need to change their culture to welcome diversity–instead of trying to make diverse populations fit into their current culture–will be best-prepared to build a foundation of diversity.
Click HERE to listen to Jackye Clayton's full keynote address.
Click above to register
Talent ManagementCareer DevelopmentCompany cultureCoronavirusDEIEmployee engagementHR TechnologyLeadershipLearning and developmentRecruitingRetentionTop Stories
Jen Colletta
Jen Colletta is managing editor at HRE. She earned bachelor's and master's degrees in writing from La Salle University in Philadelphia and spent 10 years as a newspaper reporter and editor before joining HRE. She can be reached at hreletters@lrp.com.
ChatGPT: 'Bigger than anything' HR has ever seen?
The 'enormous possibilities' for ChatGPT, according to Josh Bersin
Josh Bersin's 9 HR areas to focus on this year
Emerging pay transparency and its impact on total rewards
Tech layoffs are rising—why Josh Bersin says that's an opportunity for...
What the Monster CHRO says will be HR's 2023 headline
© 2023. Human Resource Executive. All rights reserved.
We use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences and repeat visits. By clicking "Accept All", you consent to the use of ALL the cookies. However, you may visit "Cookie Settings" to provide a controlled consent. Click to view our cookie policy.


A range of Bear Grylls products to suit everyone from weekend anglers to full-on action men.
We stock knives, multi-tools and survival kits, all manufactured to the highest quality by Gerber and endored by Bear Grylls.
Rugged construction, spring loaded pliers, external locking tools and an extra grippy handle earn this tool its name: the Ultimate Multi-tool.


text:
package services;

import dao.Database;
import models.Rate;
import org.sql2o.Connection;

/**
 * Created by aserafin on 27/11/15.
 */
public class RatesRepository {
    public static void insertRate(Rate rate) {
        String sql = "insert into rates(schoolid, stars, ip, createdat) values(:schoolId, :stars, :ip, :createdAt)";
        try(Connection connection = Database.getConnection()) {
            rate.id = (Integer)connection.createQuery(sql).bind(rate).executeUpdate().getKey();
        }
    }
}

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


text:
namespace autofill {

// static
StrikeDatabase* StrikeDatabaseFactory::GetForProfile(Profile* profile) {
  return static_cast<StrikeDatabase*>(
      GetInstance()->GetServiceForBrowserContext(profile, true));
}

// static
StrikeDatabaseFactory* StrikeDatabaseFactory::GetInstance() {
  return base::Singleton<StrikeDatabaseFactory>::get();
}

StrikeDatabaseFactory::StrikeDatabaseFactory()
    : BrowserContextKeyedServiceFactory(
          "AutofillStrikeDatabase",
          BrowserContextDependencyManager::GetInstance()) {
}

StrikeDatabaseFactory::~StrikeDatabaseFactory() = default;

KeyedService* StrikeDatabaseFactory::BuildServiceInstanceFor(
    content::BrowserContext* context) const {
  Profile* profile = Profile::FromBrowserContext(context);

  leveldb_proto::ProtoDatabaseProvider* db_provider =
      profile->GetDefaultStoragePartition()->GetProtoDatabaseProvider();

  // Note: This instance becomes owned by an object that never gets destroyed,
  // effectively leaking it until browser close. Only one is created per
  // profile, and closing-then-opening a profile returns the same instance.
  return new StrikeDatabase(db_provider, profile->GetPath());
}

}  // namespace autofill


text:
Big Fish, Bullshit
— Galen Strawson calls out the "narrativist orthodoxy" in his review of Jerome Bruner's Making Stories. Strawson argues, and he is right, that we are not "constituted" by the stories of our lives in which we cast ourselves as characters. While having a sense that one's life has gone well may involve seeing it as having had a satisfying narrative arc, the conditions for a satisfying arc are not something we are free to concoct from the abundant matter of imagination.
Bruner never raises the question of whether there is any sense in which one's self-narrative should be accurate or realistic. Those who favour the extreme fictionalist or post-modernist version of the narrative self-creation view don't care about this, both because they don't care about truth and because a fiction isn't open to criticism by comparison with reality (it doesn't matter that there is no Middle Earth). But honesty and realism about self and past must matter. There are innumerable facts about one's character and history that don't depend on one's inventions. One can't found a good life on falsehood.
Strawson's point should lead us to ask what makes a good story a good story. Presumably it has something to do with relating to the world, and to others, in the right sort of way. And the right way to relate is a fact about the world, independent of the stories we tell.
Reason editors with degrees in literature or film eager to praise consumer culture for providing the stuff of narrative self-invention, take note.
[Link via A&L Daily.]
The Gender Politics of Mad Men
Prev In Defense of the Caucus!
Next Baby it's Cold Outside, and… So what?
wph says:
I'm wondering if the choice of a starting point for this analysis, right after the recession of the early 80s, is skewing this at all.
Q.Q.Q.! says:
What's really embarrassing is to believe that Marx (who even said before he died, "I am not a Marxist") would have approved of 20th-century Marxist movements, so I wouldn't consider them "influenced by Marx" so much as "using Marx as an excuse to grab power." On the other hand, Rand would have championed the rise of neoliberalism. One of its legacies is that in the richest country in the world, 18,000 people die in each year from lack of health insurance.
Jayson Virissimo says:
"18,000 people die in each year from lack of health insurance"
What's really embarrassing is to believe that Marx (who even said before he died, "I am not a Marxist") would have approved of 20th-century Marxist movements
This claim was never made.
On the other hand, Rand would have championed the rise of neoliberalism
A) Who cares.
B) If she would have preferred neo-liberalism to Marxism that would have made her "correct". Ditto for Karl.
18,000 people die in each year from lack of health insurance.
The spurious nature of this claim aside, you are right about one thing, societies dealing with abject poverty usually are not too concerned with wonky details about the provision of insurance.
Rand wasn't a neoliberal. She was more in line with Austrian economics, I guess.
stevenHam says:
Even if true, it needs to be judged against those saved by not having national healthcare.
Anti Citizen One says:
http://nationaldeathservice.blogspot.com/2009/07/10-of-nhs-patients-admitted-to-hospital.html
10% of NHS patients admitted to hospital "suffer some form of harm"
A committee of MPs has called for urgent action on patient safety in the NHS. The Health Committee said services "are not safe enough yet." Chairman of the Committee, Kevin Barron MP, said:
"Reviews of patients' case notes indicates that in the NHS and in other healthcare systems as many as 10% of patients admitted to hospital suffer some form of harm, much of which is avoidable.
Yep… and it probably doesn't even count those hurt in non blatant ways (wait lists, denied expensive drugs or treatments, et cetera)… ie, those hurt by the system working as designed vs. screw ups and dirty NHS hospitals…
thatlllarnya – I've always had an enormous memory--pretty well stuffed. Now, at 75, the memory's starting to go and, I'd suppose, so will many of the memories. So, whether or not readers find such content interesting, it'll serve as a mnemonic. To a great extent, I am my stories and wouldn't want to forget who I am. My memory's sometimes faulty--even at its very best. So, my first story shall be one very well illustrating just that point.
geneberman says:
QQQ:
"Lack of health insurance" as "cause of death?" C'mon, man wha'd'areye, nuts hangin' out the window?
rmashate
ronmashate says:
I've always read Marx as science fiction. He makes more sense that way. Seriously.
epgavin – Good egg.
Gavin Sullivan says:
Re: "The most powerful way to argue the affirmative is to compare the number of human beings murdered by the devotees of each."
Why would one judge an intellectual based on the actions of her 'devotees'?
Historically, many more people have identified as Marxists than as 'Randites'. So–even if the underlying attribute were agreed to be a rational basis upon which to rank quality–your claim would have the persuasiveness of 'there are fewer people suffering from cancer in North Dakota than in Japan.'
LemmusLemmus says:
In particular, how many people outside of northern America have ever even heard of Rand? Short, imperfect illustration:
Search for books, keywords "Karl Marx" on amazon.com: 49307 results
Search for books, keywords "Ayn Rand" on amazon.de: 120 results.
noname123456789
NoName says:
Way to choose your amazons, Lemmus
uknowbetter says:
Stupid Germans.
"Ayn Rand" on Amazon.com: 6,066 results
ryan yin says:
The larger sample seems like a good point, but I think you're giving the followers argument short shrift. I'm not necessarily claiming it's incredibly strong evidence, but surely the actions of people following a theory are some evidence, in a Bayesian sense? If you had two theories that you were equally likely were correct/good, and then you noticed that literally every single person following one was a psychopath and everyone following the other went on to accomplish wonderful things that made society better, would you still literally be indifferent between the two? Those records would literally give you no information?
oops, sloppy proofreading. "… two theory that you thought were equally …"
Lorenzo from Oz – Melbourne, Victoria – An accidental small businessman who reads a lot and thinks about what he reads, sometimes productively.
Lorenzo from Oz says:
Part of Marxism's appeal has always been the sense of having both Grand Insight and Pure Intentions, so of course wonderful doctrine is contrasted to messy reality. That any defender of "capitalism" is burdened by all its sins but no Marxist is burdened by the legacy of {every single attempt to put it into practice} is just par for the course.
Not that the doctrine is all that impressive: Marx's argument for the labour theory of value is fairly awful and the theory demonstrably false.
kzndr says:
How about the fact that in spite of the depravities of those who appropriated Marx's work and despite the many and deep flaws in his thinking, Marx was actually a great philosopher, a historian, a penetrating observer of current events, and often a fantastic writer (yes, he was often also very bad; but his best prose sparkles), whereas Rand was a hack philosopher and an awful novelist?
Good points, all. Except that he was a really bad philosopher, historian, and observer. It's kind of a travesty of horrible misconstruals and willful misreadings.
griffin13 says:
"his best prose sparkles"
So you've read it in the original German? (sorry, couldn't resist)
I find Marx's view that society is a dichotomous struggle between two "classes" to be as grossly simplistic as Rand's struggle between the producers and looters, or whatever she called them. Even if you believe that Marx was a great philosopher and Rand was a hack, in light of the last century how can you possibly defend the ideas of the former over the latter?
shane25 says:
Marx was a fraud and would invent data to support his premise rather than the other way around. He was a liar and wherever his ideas have been put into practice the result has been increased human suffering. His entire premise is contrary to human nature. He was also a horrible human being. (Intellectuals by Paul M. Johnson) Why exactly is Rand a hack philosopher? What makes her any more of a Hack philosopher than Marx? In my humble opinion, having read some of the works of both authors, Marx was a hack philosopher as well in addition to being a bully, a mooch and a liar. In addition, from what I have read, he could really have used some help in the area of personal hygiene.
themaverickformerlyknownasbasilbrush
michaelsteele says:
Unimpressive argument there – lots of assertions, some personal attacks, and no evidence to support your claims. Rand remains a standing joke among philosophers, and no-one takes her seriously in politics. Sure, there's a fringe movement among life's perpetual adolescents, but adults realize that Rand wrote crude fantasies that are simply not applicable to real life.
thehova says:
At the very least, Rand's system of philosophy did not encourage or glorify violence like Marx's did.
The good news is I never intended to impress anyone with my argument. This is a comment section on a blog, not an annotated dissertation comparing Marx and Rand. In addition, you have no evidence to support your claims and are assertions only. Not being a "serious philosopher" myself (I consider myself to be more of a "serious engineer" that builds and produces rather than just talking) and not having any idea what constitutes a "serious philosopher" I would not know who is considered a "standing joke" among them. I am guessing that you have data and sources to prove such a general and far-reaching statement. But, I do not really expect that you would because this is a comment section on a blog and I do not worry too much about such things. I also doubt very much that you speak for all "adults" who know about "real life." I am sure you have many thoroughly researched sources to support that unimpressive argument. I did provide one source in my comment regarding Marx (Paul M. Johnson) as opposed to all the sources you provided. For some reason "the pot calling the kettle black" comes to mind after reading your post.
I don't care what you and the other fetuses claim to think.
secularrepubs
mdh2112 says:
… and philosophers in general are a standing joke among people who take ideas seriously.
It would be nice if someone who obviously dislikes Rand and her ideas could say something substantial about her – showing some passing familiarity with her work, since understanding would be far too much to ask – rather than simply saying she was "deeply stupid", a "hack", "crude", or any of the other standard dismissive insults.
It's enough to convince me that the people who express the deepest dislike for her are the ones whose objection rests on a refusal to engage their intellect, lest they find they can't answer her.
..and philosophers remain a standing joke to the rest of us.
"… but adults realize that Rand wrote crude fantasies that are simply not applicable to real life."
"Adults" and "I" are not interchangeable, sad sack.
That's just not true. I remember even Richard Rorty, who is sympathetic to some of Marx's social appeals, flatly stated that Marx is simply bad philosophy.
Engles cleaned up a lot of Marx's intellectual messes.
I think both are over rated. Sweeping narrative history is simplistic and avoids true / deep study of various cultures. It's infected some modern social sciences (such as sociology) to the point of making them useless (including the 'education' and degree associated with it). They're just all biased opinions thrown out as something more than that….
Fact is, commitment to some kind of socialism and fluency in the jargon of Marxism used to be mandatory for serious intellectuals. And there's something glamorous in the very idea of the intellectual….So it is not only possible proudly to confess Marx's influence on one's thought, but it remains possible in some quarters to impress by doing so.
I would love to hear what Robin Hanson would have to say.
novabyblos
Brian Patrick Moore says:
I think it's one of the great achievements of the 20th century that most of us managed to decide that even one ideology was beyond contempt, and that anyone who paid attention to it was an idiot. It might be asking too much to hope for two.
Of course, it is probably one of the great failures of the 20th century that it took a few million corpses to agree on the first, and then we couldn't even decide on the second, even after a few million more bodies.
teageegeepea – If you're willing to do a little legwork you can probably find out who I really am, and then be disappointed when you find I'm nobody.
TGGP says:
To fix the Marx/Rand/Jesus awfulness-o-meter, you have to adjust for the number of years their writings have been around.
Personally, I find it odd that its so much more acceptable to be a communist than a nazi. Some nazis these days say, no we're not that kind of nazi, we're third-positionist Strasserites, but nobody's buying. I don't even think that kind of disavowal is necessary for communists. Zizek still calls himself a Stalinist, right?
robfromtx67 – Texas
liberalrob says:
It ought to be less embarrassing to have been influenced by Ayn Rand than by Karl Marx.
Really? That's rather like saying Ted Kaczinski (the Unabomber) was less of a terrorist than Tim McVeigh. It's morally untenable to say "well, the Unabomber is more acceptable because he only killed a handful of professors, whilc McVeigh blew up a building full of people."
And you wonder why Objectivism gets a bad name…it's stuff like this, Will. Cold, unfeeling, heartless.
Isn't it more like saying, for example, Will Wilkinson is more acceptable than Tim McVeigh"? Who are these mass-murdering Objectivists? (And if they exist, why aren't they the ones who are giving Objectivism a bad name, rather than someone saying "hey, murder is bad, and mass murder more so"?)
At least McVeigh occasionally wrote coherent prose, which is more than the Queen of Galt's Gulch ever managed. And let's face it, Marx provided a sustained and radical critique of capitalism, rather than being a parasite on it, which is basically what Rand and her fellow libertarians amount to.
No one argues that Marx didn't criticize capitalism. What's being argued is that his argument is really shoddy, his history is entirely bunk, his economics painfully & demonstrably wrong, that his philosophy is flawed and sort of silly, and, oh yeah, that people putting his ideas into effect are the world's biggest mass-murderers. And don't pull this "Marxism has never been tried" nonsense. If that were true, then you wouldn't have seen defenses of the Soviets et al up to their collapse (not to mention the idiots who still walk around wearing Mao & Che t-shirts). And, no, in point of fact, Marx wasn't a great human rights-loving hater of dictators.
J R says:
"sustained and radical…"
that might make an apt description for herpes as well.
Except there is no such thing as 'capitalism'…. it's simply a conspiracy theory… passed off as fact by Marxists…
wlpeak says:
Objectivism is not libertarianism.
Everyone who takes up the Objectivist philosophy of "why should I subsidize those who are less productive than me" participates in the slow strangulation of the poor. Objectivists are not mass murderers in the singular; it is as a group, as a collective, that they can be called such. Their denial of society or social responsibility is what renders them cold-blooded killers; they don't have to pull the trigger themselves, they just elect to stand by and do nothing. Objectivism calls for the murder of the concept of society. There can be no such thing as an "Objectivist society."
I do not call Stalin a Marxist. He was an authoritarian dictator who ruled by terror and fear, not according to a theory of economic equalization. Marxism was a facade, a convenient cover story to conceal his true intentions. Marx never advocated mass murder in order to accomplish his utopia; there is such a thing as a bloodless revolution. The atrocities were committed by power-mad individuals with no higher purpose than to preserve and extend their own power, just as has always been done throughout history.
Right, I can see how you can think that failing to give someone money and mass-murder are roughly identical to a first approximation. That's a good point. And given that the market demonstrably does infinitely more to help the poor than legions of sophomoric Marxists ever have, you certainly do seem to be making a good argument that in no way constitutes an embarrassing defense of the indefensible.
And hey, it's not like Marx ever advocated dictatorship or ever said that the communist utopia can and should be accomplished by force in certain circumstances (can you imagine how embarrassing it'd be either of those were true?). But I think you're a little unfair to Stalin. He actually accomplished quite a bit of economic equalization — you know, kill the rich people, destroy the sources of wealth, make everyone equally poor. What's not to love?
To call Objectivists "murderers' is to completely obliterate the concept of murder, and to engage in the worst kind of blood libel. And we only advocate "doing nothing" when it comes to government coercion. You evidently feel this is an essential requirement of society. Not retaliatory force, but the initiation of force by the government against its citizens. Gotcha.
Really now, you are equally as liable as every Objectivist in the death of every person whom you did not personally help.
curmudgeonly troll says:
Ayn Rand's philosophy can be usefully summed up as: individual liberty is the only thing that matters.
Karl Marx's philosophy can be usefully summed up as: economic equality is the only thing that matters.
I would follow the smart man who said that any political choice must reconcile individual liberty, equality or fairness, and efficiency. (Fascism could be summed up as: efficiency at achieving the desired end is the only thing that matters)
In that sense both Rand and Marx are equally interesting extreme thought experiments, and swallowing either one whole would be equally misguided, and being influenced by both as good examples of how not to think would be equally useful.
When have millions of people been exterminated in the name of individual liberty? Are you sure these extremes are equally as bad?
vork says:
This point changes nothing about the fact that both Marx and Rand espoused idealistic fantasies that pathologically ignore the realities of human nature.
Of course Marx advocated violence for his "cause", so there's probably a reason for more direct deaths in his column, but that doesn't change the fact that I feel deeply embarrassed for anyone who uncritically accepts either Marxist or Randian dogmas as something desirable.
sarahrolph says:
"Uncritically accepts" is not the topic that was introduced for discussion. The post is about whether someone should be embarrassed by having been "influenced by" these authors.
emergingchurch
No, Ayn Rand's philosophy can be usefully summed up as: I got mine, F**k you.
aaronagostini
I think it's the whole perception of fighting for the underdog. Certainly that's not what happened in any Marx-inspired dictatorship. But they always advertised that they were working on behalf of The People. Rand, by putting a sort of naive egotism to the forefront, seems to champion the winners over the little people, which will always be a tough sell, even though we all operate from self-centeredness in one way or another.
I think it's true that Rand's work is often seen this way — as seeming to champion the "winners" over "the little people."
It strikes me that this is a Marxist-influenced perception!
Well, populist-influenced at least. Though going by Ariely's "Predictably Irrational", humans seem to be hard-wired to (depending on which particular view you take) make things even or punish the winners. I do agree that there was an underlying idea of doing good work in Rand's work (like the hamburger that was presented as a philosophical ideal in Atlas Shrugged).
navigator says:
When any government levies a tax and takes away a man's honestly earned resources, it forcibly takes away the equivalent of the portion of that man's life used to acquire those resources. Taxation is thus a partial form of slavery.
When the taxation is done by duly elected representatives, it is a more bearable form of partial slavery, but still a partial slavery.
When the government uses the taxes to provide protection and to secure rights, then it is a necessary partial slavery, used to prevent some other force from imposing a worse form of slavery.
When a government is not representative, or when a government goes beyond its role in protecting and securing rights, the amount of partial slavery is increased, and the amount of freedom is decreased.
The United States already has too high a degree of partial slavery, and is proposing to increase that amount – to be like other nations. I hope we can reverse this trend, and advance toward more freedom.
This is the most pathetic piece of self-pitying idiocy that I have seen in years. Slavery? Oh yes, you are picking cotton under the lash when the government taxes you, aren't you? Even by Randian standards, you qualify for the funny farm.
Wow – major ad hominem invective! With an attempt at sarcasm.
Consider the prinicple: slavery is when a powerful entity forces a weaker entity to spend his or her time doing the bidding of the more powerful entity. In taxation, a powerful government forces a weak citizen to spend a portion of his or her time generating revenue for that government.
When this revenue is used to protect that citizen and secure his or her rights, such a practice is justifiable – to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just power from the consent of the governed.
When this revenue is used for other activities, however, the use of governmental power is very, very questionable. You might possibly have to pick some cotton to satisfy the IRS.
In its pure form, capitalism is two people coming to a voluntary agreement on the exchange of goods and services. They set the price, or the wage, or the barter. Replicate this billions of times, and you have the system – "voluntary" is the key word.
In its pure form, communism is two people looking to a central authority to tell them the terms and conditions for the exchange of goods and services. That central authority holds the power to set prices and wages, and to thus direct how people spend their time – another form of slavery.
Communism and slavery have a lot "in common". Marx did not, of course, mention this. The similarity doesn't lend itself to sparkling prose.
teslanick
Nick Hushser says:
Your attempt at defining slavery is weak and uninspired. Slavery is many things, but it is not, by definition, when a powerful entity forces another into absolute manumission.
Check out "Slavery and Social Death" by Orlando Patterson.
Hunter says:
There is no 'pure form' of communism. Marx, wrong as he was about most things, didn't think there would (need to) be any central authority (for long). Marx only wanted the profits of production to redound to the laborers – the oppoosite of slavery. Lenin was the one who put down the anarcho-syndicalists and spearheaded the centralization/bureaucratization of authority in Russia to implement the Marxist program. While the Leninist (or Trotskyist) system was capable of casual evil (power corrupts, after all, in our system today in America as much as anywhere), it took the paranoid sociopath from Georgia to really hit world-historical levels of death and destruction. Blaming 'communism' is just intellectually lazy. Of course, the Marxist program is hopelessly utopian, precisely because it fails to account for the iron law of oligarchy, and is based on nonsense economics. Then again, there's as much a pure form of communism as there's a pure form of capitalism, and here in the real world where "two people coming to a voluntary agreement on the exchange of goods and services" never happens off ebay, we recognize that Rand's work (and that of her acolytes) is equally hopelessly utopian and even more useless for critiqueing (= understanding in order to change for the better) actually existing social ills than Marx's work (and that of his acolytes).
Groucho Engels says:
Capitalism is when a capitalist, one with money and the means of production, offers a worker a chance to earn money he requires to live. He can't say no to this oppurtunity so he must work for the capitalist. Capital is controlled by the few (who always seek to control more capital) so there will always be more workers than capitalists. So the capitalist always has the advantage over the worker. The worker will starve to death, die of preventable disease, or die from exposure without money. The capitalist controls how money is distributed.
That is wage slavery 101.
Syndicalism is two people coming together and saying "we are both required to work this machine and our work is required to create a thing of value so let's profit from the sale of it's value equally."
That's justice 101.
trotskysicepick says:
Brilliant, michaelsteele, how you manage, with a single swipe of ad hominem, to deftly defeat all those who, like Rand and Nozick, propound taxation-as-slavery arguments. No premises or conclusion needed when a little name-calling will do, eh?
It isn't slavery when michaelsteele holds the whip. Boy will that fetus be in for a surprise once people get tired of his slavery.
SimonHalliday says:
Sorry Will, but it's like you're ignoring the host of effective and interesting work that people who have been, and will continue to be, affected by Marx have done. This isn't necessarily about being a 'Marxist' or _believing in_ Marxism, but understanding that there were relevant points within Marx's writing, rather than devoting yourself (without humility about its potential to be wrong) to an ideology that has done immense damage.
I think here about interesting writers like Jerry Cohen, Sam Bowles, John Roemer, Pranab Bardhan, Jon Elster, Herb Gintis, and others who were undoubtedly 'affected' by Marx, but have made substantial contributions to, and interrogations of, our understanding of marginal effects, of the extended order, of self-ownership. It should not be embarrassing for them to say they've been influenced (positively/negatively) by Marx, they should just say it, and we can all move on.
Whats with the swipe about brooklyn?
leonidr2013
leonidr says:
Oh come on, nothing is embarrassing in Brooklyn!
Name says:
I'm inclined to agree with Mr. Wilkinson but to be fair we should allow Ms. Rand more time.
Not a bad start for Rand, I suppose:
1) Pinochet's Chile: 2,279
2) Lancet's account of excess death's in Iraq due to invasion (equating Rand's philosophy with the neo-liberal ideals ostensibly underpinning the invasion): 654,965
3) Plus however many eventually die 'seasteading.'
godfreyofboulogne
bohemond says:
Jeez, what a stretch.
Michael Drake
Michael Drake says:
"The most powerful way to argue the affirmative is to compare the number of human beings murdered by the devotees of each. That line of attack ought to be decisive…"
Yes! Also, one should be more embarrassed to have been influenced by the Beatles than by Britney Spears.
Karl Marx(1818-1883) did not have a theory of morality; he had a theory of history. Thus, Marxism was not about right or wrong but about what will happen in history. Marx was contemptuous of people who judged things in moral terms. When diehards say that Marxism has actually never been "tried" (despite what Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Castro, Ho, and Daniel Ortega thought they were doing), they don't understand that Marxism was not a rule for behavior or a program for action; it was supposed to be the theory of a deterministic mechanism that will produce the future, a theory of actions that will arise spontaneously because of historical circumstances — although we can infer what kinds of actions people, including ourselves, will be taking — after all, Marx said that the purpose of his work was to change the world, not just understand it. It is the theory, however, the world will change because of the objective economic conditions, not because of some decisions we make. This was not a theory about "human nature" or "human psychology," but about how the mode of economic production (how goods and services are produced) determines all the other political, social, cultural, and moral structures of a society (though some Marxists are uncomfortable with this in an absolute sense). The needs of the "English petty bourgeois" are thus not "false needs" [note], however dismissive Marx sounds, but true needs in relation to a capitalistic mode of production — needs which will change over time, in a historicist sense, as the mode of production changes. As a "science" of history, Marxism would succeed or fail to the extent that it could actually predict the evolution of production and its various effects.
Marx thought that as capitalism had replaced feudalism with a new mode of production, which was more productive and efficient, the same thing would happen to produce a replacement for capitalism. In the end, as the workers were impoverished (when capitalists drove down wages) and the number of capitalists dwindled (as competition was replaced by larger and larger monopolies), the capitalists would end up with no one to sell their goods to and nothing to do with the capital derived from their profits. This would produce increasingly severe credit and banking crises, until the proletariat would easily tip over the whole rotten structure and replace it with a classless society.
Centralisation of the means of production and socialisation of labour at last reach a point where they become incompatible with their capitalist integument. This integument is burst asunder. [Capital, Vol. I, p.837, Charles H. Kerr & Co., Chicago, 1906, translation by Edward Aveling, quoted by Thomas Sowell, On Classical Economics, Yale, 2006, p.170]
Already in this we find the essence of the fallacy of Marxist economics. Marx believes that as the dialectic of history evolves new modes of production, greater productivity and greater wealth will be created, ultimately eliminating the need for alienated and exploited labor. However, there is not a variable in Marxist value theory to account for greater productivity. If labor (or "socialy necessary" labor) creates value, then a greater quantity of labor will create greater value, but only in quantity, not in kind. More labor for pyramid building just builds more pyramids. Thus, some other variable is involved besides labor. In fact, that is capital. Labor intensive production gives way to capital intensive production, and greater capital means great productivity, not just in quantity, but in kind. But Marx does not believe that capital exists, which is why capitalism is called "capitalism." This means that Marxism cannot explain increased productivity. And then Marxism also contains another trend disparaging to productivity as such. Jack London, less well remembered now as a communist than as an author, said that a worker who is more productive than others "is already a scab," i.e. a strike breaker. Thus, the view seems to be than increases in producitivity are part of the exploitation of labor. (from friesian.com)
Scrutineer says:
If Marxism is just a "theory of a deterministic mechanism," and "the mode of economic production … determines all the other political, social, cultural, and moral structures of a society," then why would Marx bother to write with the stated intent of changing the world? If Marx rejected the idea of judging things in moral terms, why did he want to change the world?
He also started a political party to implement his ideas. 'bill' is ignorant if he doesn't recognize that.
mikecaton
mdcaton says:
It's interesting to see the immediate knee-jerk "but Jesus and Mohammed have blood on their hands too" response, when Wilkinson isn't talking about religion at all; and last I checked, Rand was an atheist. As an admirer of Rand and a libertarian myself, I'm quite happy to put Marx's political descendants at number two in the mass-murder hit parade, if only because they have some serious competition from jihadis and Inquisitors in the game of top-down, ideology-matters-more-than-reality-and-human-suffering ways of "thinking". Number one with a bullet!
jkauzlar says:
I have to jump in here to defend my beloved Marx…
1) It's intellectually lazy to oppose Ayn Rand to Karl Marx as though those two are the poles of a single one-dimensional spectrum. The only reason Marx is still used in opposition to capitalism is because socialism doesn't have a widely-recognized poster-boy.
2) A lot of annoying self-described "Marxists" tend to use ridiculous jargon in everyday discussion. Yes, its dumb, and these people probably also think that "Stalin didn't practice REAL communism."
3) Marxist criticism (to be distinguished from Marxists) is alive and well and is an interesting lens through which to view your capitalist utopias. It's less a political view than a sociological or cultural one.
4) Marx made some devastating errors, but he was nevertheless a brilliant man with ideas that revolutionized thought. This is why he is widely studied, not because of communism. Is it possible a person can have some good ideas and some bad ideas, or does a bad idea cancel out all the good ones? In your case, an idea you happen to disagree with cancels out everything else. That's what makes people narrow.
Can you think of any of Marx's ideas that were both true AND original? I can think of many that are true and many that are original, but none that are both.
My answer is, yes, but you're missing my point.
Above all, Marxism nowadays is method of criticism. Whether a method of criticism is "true" or not is debatable. Is the scientific method 'true'? At best, Marxism is outdated. Plato is also outdated, and his 'Republic' would be frowned upon and probably characterized as totalitarianism, by today's standards, but we still find his work useful and insightful.
I think you're looking to argue with someone who will defend Communism, which I can't do. I will defend socialism-lite (capitalism tempered by government regulation) against libertarianism, but don't pretend Obama's socialism-lite, or socialism in general, has anything whatsoever to do with communism, Marx or Marxism. It doesn't.
I recommend reading the first volume of Das Kapital if you want to get a real sense of Marx's ideas, and to what sort of culture he was applying these ideas to.
They sure do. It's more control by the state with communism being even further control the by the state.
@uknowbetter "They sure do. It's more control by the state with communism being even further control the by the state."
Communism has no market. Socialism has an active market. Compare, say, Finland, and the old Soviet or communist-Asia countries. What similarities do you see? They're completely, totally different. No comparison.
As I said, you guys are intellectually lazy. The real world isn't either/or, however neat it looks on paper.
Blue Collar Todd – California – My unique perspective comes from having a Master's degree in the Philosophy of Religion and Ethics, and from working in the oil industry. I blog around my work schedule. This blog attempts to confront both religious and political Liberalism which is pervasive in our society, even our churches.
BlueCollarTodd says:
I noted that when Barack Obama was inaugurated it was the beginning of a period of Darkness in America, taking a twist on Arthur Koestler's Darkness at Noon. America was Bush fatigued and the Liberal media did not do it's job to analyze what Obama really believed. Now we are in a spiral to kinder and gentler Marxist State.
Julian Sanchez says:
Thiiis seems wrong to me. For one, to be fair, you'd need there to be a few actual Objectivist societies so we could see whether they somehow yielded mass death. I'm being a little facetious here, but really, history is presumably littered with thinkers whose works are basically without value, but who bear no responsibility for any human catastrophe by dint of neglect. And while surely it should be embarrassing at this late date to want to try to advance an unreconstructed Marxist political program—you know, for really-real this time, where it works somehow—I don't know why that should attach to someone who thinks there's some nugget of useful insight in the corpus that might be worth building on.
Not a Marx admirer but I have read a bit and find a certain irony in Kunkel's writing. He is taking Marx's historical ken and steering it away from Marx's use of it in the service of a progressive materialism but rather towards it's opposites. It smellls a bit more Tyler Durden's anti capitalism (stop history, stop production, stop consumption, let me off the train) than Karl Marx's (take the means of production, cut out owners and middlemen / use planning instead, and share it's products)… The anti materialist / Durden vision is closer to the European notions of the right wing…. I'd have to read more to see if my initial takes were on the right tracks….
Putting On Its Shoes
marckhouri says:
Trying to get into the details of arguing with someone who believes Marxist theory and dogma is much like arguing with a schizophrenic or cult devotee. Marxist positions cannot be arrived at through reason and therefore, devotees cannot be swayed by reason, it is useless to attempt to engage. Devotion to Marxist theory and dogma results solely from the existence of pre-existing psychological deficiences that remain unaddressed and manifest as neuroses unrecognized by the host, resulting in an external projection on others of what is wrong with themselves. No cure but psycotherapy or obliteration.
You know, Freud is at least as demonstrably wrong as Marx.
??? What does Freud have to do with it? You don't have to subscribe to Freud's theories to understand psychological orders exist and manifest in observable behavior and beliefs detached from reality. Hope that was just sarcasm that I missed, otherwise it's obtuse.
"No cure but psycotherapy [sic] or obliteration."
If that wasn't a joke, it was fighting words. I don't like it when people talk about obliteration.
"Marxist positions cannot be arrived at through reason…"
This is just false and betrays a deep lack of understanding of the nature of reason itself. Reason and reality may (and indeed have) proven many Marxist positions to be wrong, but that's a different thing altogether.
"Devotion to Marxist theory and dogma results solely from the existence of pre-existing psychological deficiences that remain unaddressed and manifest as neuroses unrecognized by the host, resulting in an external projection on others of what is wrong with themselves."
This is freudian through and through. Devotees of any dogma are quite like cult members, Randroids at least as much as Marxists. Both equally annoying. But this bit about psychological deficiencies manifesting as neuroses is freudian nonsense. There has been actual progress in cognitive neuroscience, and even some progress in understanding cultists and paranoiacs in the last 40 years or so. WRT cults, all are susceptible. Training in a hard science can help (somewhat), but in the right social environment even trained skeptical empiricists can be remade. The only psychological deficiencies at play are those inherent in human nature – which is to say the structure and function of the normal human brain.
What Freud has to do with it is that your entire 'analysis' of the Marxist's psychology is bs, and really nothing more than an ad hominem attack that is fallaciously 'justified' by reference to pseudoscience, and then used to call (hyperbolically, I'm sure, but still unacceptably) for violence. I was trying to gently point out the fallacious nature of your comment, but was obviously too opaque. Sorry about that.
No point arguing with a zombie. There is only one thing you do with zombies.
Alex del Castillo says:
What's with the pirate shirt hatin'?
egoist says:
More broadly, it's worth considering the merits of Ayn Rand vs virtually all other ideologies WRT sacrifice; picking [some] people down to their bones for the good of others. Show me a man that completely rejects sacrifice – always – and you have found a man that embraces Ayn Rand and life on earth.
JPPP says:
I'm a leftist, but I'm perfectly happy to say that I hate Marx. I came to hate Marx as a result of what I experienced in academia, which is currently experiencing a great deal of unemployment. And what are the many liberals and leftists of academia doing about that unemployment? Precisely nothing. In fact, back in 1995 when some Yale graduate students, worried about unemployment after graduation, formed a union and went on strike, their leftist professors did what they could to squash the strike. Read Cary Nelson's "Manifesto of a Tenured Radical," p. 143, for the sordid details. (I'm always amazed that those who hate the left are unfamiliar with this episode.)
Once I came to my senses and realized that leftism was horribly wrong about things, I decided that the important thing isn't equalizing wealth. Instead, it is equalizing power. And when I looked at matters from this perspective, what a change of view I had. America came off looking pretty good, while the communist countries were (and still are) some of the worst offenders of all. I've often taunted other leftists by asking, "If Castro is so progressive, why hasn't he resigned so that a woman or a black could take over?" Of course, they have no response.
There's a lot more I could say, but the mass killings really says it all.
John Pepple
KarenT says:
Ironic that "Marxism, by contrast, is a discipline of deep memory and long anticipation." A primary objective of Pol Pot, Marx's student, was to obliterate the cultural memory of an entire people. He almost succeeded. Capitalism has never done anything close to that in terms of destroying memory and history.
E4321 says:
Will, Congratulations. The comments of your readers are very impressive. Anyone with such a following is definately worth following.
gregransom
Joe_Blotnick says:
Obama is up front and proud of the fact that Marxism is the dominant influence on his intellectual coming of age — he speaks of seeking out Marxist professors at Occidental, he speaks of his intellectual mentoring in high school by a poet who long labored in the Soviet Union's communist party in America (Frank Marshall Davis), he tells us he spent his spare time going to Socialist conferences while at Columbia, he sought out Marx inspired "Critical Legal Studies" and "Critical Race Theory" professors at Harvard Law, and he attended for 20 years a church run by a man who subscribed to a "black" version of Marxist inspired "Liberation Theology".
Rand, Hayek, Friedman, Mises, Burke, Smith, Hume, Locke, Jefferson, Madison, Washington, Adams, etc.?
And I forgot to mention Obama's self confessed fan-boy admiration for Fanon, Said, Du Bois, Alinsky, and other anti-Western, anti-liberal, anti-freedom far left radicals.
You can read all this for yourself. It's in Obama's memoir.
Working as an editor for a Wall Street financial newsletter covering the world of business and capitalist production ?
Working "behind enemy lines" to quote Obama's own words.
Tcobb says:
The thing about Marxism is that it is so simple that even an idiot can understand it. Its like astrology, but it takes less mental discipline to understand the key concepts. And, once you get into it even an idiot can convince themselves that they are "intellectuals." Like astrology, it pretends to explain everything. And like astrology, the results suck. It has no predictive power.
I think its ironic that people who style themselves as "progressives" embrace 19th century ideas that were totally shown to be defective in the 20th century. But what is a "progressive" other than a Neanderthal with delusions of grandeur?
icallahan120493
I Callahan says:
Tcobb – absolutely flawless comment. You described Marxism in 2 paragraphs perfectly.
You guys are sick
Leftists that celebrate communism are sick fetuses in need of a medical procedure.
notmyrealname
dfstearns says:
"The most powerful way to argue the affirmative is to compare the number of human beings murdered by the devotees of each."
This is the single worst point I've ever seen you make on this blog, Will–a rare blunder. I agree 100% that cleaving to Marxism ought to be embarrassing, but there are way better ways to judge a thinker than by looking at who flies the same banner. If you thought (rightly) it was unfair to judge Megan's politics by her parents, then I'd think you could see the hysteria of judging a thinker by their intellectual siblings. If someone killed a union leader and claimed to be a devotee of Hayek or Friedman, would that have *any* standing at all on how respectable it is to be a libertarian?
All else aside the theory of class war should be uncontroversial.
Those with power seek to expand or extend their power at the expense of those without power.
A simple reality. We see it every day with politicians and captains of industry, with influence peddling, with biased media, and taxes wages and war.
Will, are you just troll baiting here? I mean Marx was amazingly influential in politics, cultural analysis, and philosophy. Whether or not he was right or wrong. I mean Plato was wrong about almost everything but he was hugely more influential than Heraclitus (though that's not a good comparison for Rand, maybe one of the lesser known roman rhetoricians instead?).
Rand has not been very influential in the realm of politics, philosophy, or cultural analysis. You don't see Libertarian internationals. There hasn't been any dictator who tried to use Rand as ideological cover (Marxism was nowhere as deadly as Leninism, Stalinism, and Maoism by the way).
Marx wasn't completely wrong and he certainly was revolutionary (as in shockingly original) in his thinking. He's the intellectual godfather of modern socialism. Ayn Rand was just a derivative Nietzschean Lockean not widely known outside of certain political circles.
Fat Steve says:
"Here is a good debate proposition: It ought to be less embarrassing to have been influenced by Ayn Rand than by Karl Marx.
Here is a good debate proposition: It ought to be less embarrassing to have been influenced by Ashlee Simpson than Ayn Rand
Clearly Ashlee Simpson comes out on the top in this debate
Here is a good debate proposition: It ought to be less embarrassing to have been influenced by Michael Vick than Ayn Rand
Michael Vick wins this one.
Wait a second…this is a really stupid debate…
neverbeenfree says:
Not one of you has even the slightest understanding of who funded Marx (Rothschild) and who were to be the sole (unmentioned) beneficiaries of state slavery (Zionists). The real issue is and has always been the central bankers, whether Marxist or capitalist. Not one of you seems to realize that these are just forms of tyranny the Zionists employ. Everyone is a slave. The few countries without central banks or Zionist masters are not much better, but they have to fight the economic hit men and/or the U.S. military non-stop. The real shocker is that none of you know of our long struggle against the central bankers. The Bolsheviks were funded by Wall Street bankers, such as Schiff–that means the U.S. taxpayers. Armand Hammer and others had private airports in the U.S.S.R. Marx/Rand are for idiots. Study Rothschild and Rockefeller.
These are your (and Obama's) overlords: Rahm and Ezekial Emanuel, Summer, Rubin, Bernanke, Paulson, Greenspan, et al. Dual-citizen Israelis are 85% responsible for all the so-called terrorist attacks. Chertoff created the police state. Dov Zakheim masterminded 9/11. You can debate right/left paradigms while the Zionists have stolen all your money, homes, gold, and lives. Who is ultimately behind the murders of 44 microbiologists and the resurrection of the 1918 pandemic?
thunder lily season
StanR says:
At the top of the list of things Will should be embarrassed by is this post, and the (lack of) reasoning therein. Those agreeing with this post should also be embarrassed, because they are willing to agree with hack reasoning clothed in a message they like to hear: "Marx is crap!"
Confirmation bias is just that easy and natural for all of us.
Points to William, Gavin Sullivan, Michael Drake, dfstearns, Groucho Engels, and fatsteve for calling out this blunder.


text:
Ratnerville
Congratulations to Chris Smith for capturing so well the dawning horror that Brooklynites have felt as the Atlantic Yards project has steamrollered into our borough ["Mr. Ratner's Neighborhood," August 14]. It's important to note that this isn't just a Brooklyn story. All New Yorkers are helping to subsidize this urban-planning disaster with their taxes—not to mention the public streets that are being given to the developer for free and the MTA's acceptance of the lowest bid for a very valuable piece of property. This monument to the hubris of developer and architect will continue to suck New Yorkers' tax dollars for decades.
—Michael Rogers, Brooklyn
I'd like to commend Smith for his thoughtful article. When I moved to New York four years ago, I temporarily rented a room just five minutes from the site in question. I'd move back to the area in a heartbeat if I could afford it. However, there is no place for someone like me in Ratner's plans: I don't meet the qualifications for low-income housing, and my income can't handle full market rates. Prices for other housing in the area will soar as well. Consequently, the neighborhoods will change for the worse, and there is nothing gradual or natural about it. Unlike the "cleaning up" of other places in the city, very little of the area's flavor will remain as local retailers are pushed out. So many others will be priced out of their history and their local culture. This isn't the equivalent of a big-box retailer shutting down mom-and-pop shops; it's burning down one city in the name of building a greater one—destroying a way of life for a quick dollar.
—Latrina Stokes, Brooklyn
I was surprised to find such a narrow take on Atlantic Yards from Chris Smith, especially following your visionary "2016" package [by Alexandra Lange, June 5], which focused on the broader challenge of "building a city for 9 million." This growth means we need to start building now for the more than 300,000 of those new residents who will soon call Brooklyn home, a population the size of Buffalo or Oakland. And that's why, in "a city that can't sprawl," as the "2016" introduction says, creating a new city center at Atlantic Yards with a major-league sports arena and thousands of units of affordable housing and new jobs above a mass-transit hub is right for Downtown Brooklyn. I respect Smith's political reporting, and I understand his concerns as a resident living near Atlantic Yards—from day one, all of us have recognized the meritorious quality-of-life concerns regarding the project. Ultimately, our city must confront the reality that more residents are flocking to Brooklyn, as Smith himself did. And it is the responsibility of public officials like myself to plan for that growth today through projects like Atlantic Yards. You can call me a "booster," but what I'm really advocating is a long-term vision that enables Brooklyn and New York City to preserve the income and ethnic diversity that define us.
—Marty Markowitz,Brooklyn Borough President
For me, the debate about Ratner's development comes down to two things: the Atlantic Center mall and the Atlantic Terminal mall—the ugliest, strangest, most horribly designed shopping centers I have ever seen. And I grew up in New Jersey, where we take our malls seriously. Ratner had his chance to prove to Brooklyn that he could develop wisely, and we already live with the consequences of his mistakes. Wouldn't it be nice if we could one day live in a world where our government gives money to build affordable housing and create jobs just because it's the right thing to do (and because it's what these people promised us in their campaign speeches) and not because someone would make a billion dollars off it?
—Kate Scelsa, Brooklyn
Correction: In "The Open-House Log" (July 31–August 7), Robert Nuzzolese was identified as managing director of the Nuzzolese Ice Company. He is, in fact, a rental agent with Mark David & Co.
something for everyone 5:18 a.m.


text:
Q: React Router not loading assets on nested routes in production Context
I'm setting up a project where I need to have a nested route "/user/:id" where the id is serves as a parameter that I can pass in.
The Problem
In development mode everything (all components, static assets, etc.) loads properly. However, when I build the react project and serve it in production mode, some of the images are not being loaded and looking for the assets on some nested route off the root domain. (I don't fully understand how react grabs the files to be served, but I've attached images that might give insight into this predicament.) The error in grabbing the assets occur when I visit any site off of the "user" path e.g. /user/234, /user/23, etc.
Below is an

*

*image of my "App.tsx" file which shows how I've set up routes

*the successful load of an asset in a path that's not "/user/"

*a failed load of assets in production when it loads the image on a path off of "/user/" - e.g. "/user/12".

Thank you!

A: Turns out that all I needed to do was add <base href="/"> to the head of my index.html file!

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


We're Here To Help.org » How Do I Do a HAFA Short Sale?
Are you in , or any other Sacramento area? We really are here to help!
More Questions About your Situation? Talk To A Certified HAFA Foreclosure Prevention Expert Today!
This entry was posted on Thursday, September 1st, 2011 at 3:44 pm	and is filed under HAFA GUIDE AND HAFA NEWS, Short Sale FAQ's, Short Sale Process 101. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.


text:
A Great War 'Family Casualty' campaign medal groups to two brothers from, Blyth, Northumberland: The Elliot brothers, Andrew James Elliot & Adam Sherlaw Elliot, Northumberland Fusiliers
The Elliot brothers were the sons of Scottish born parents from Berwickshire, Walter Elliot (Coal Trimmer employed with LNER) and Margaret Elliot, of 32 Stanley Street, Blyth, Northumberland. The 1911 National Census for England & Wales records the brothers residing in Blyth, Northumberland, at 29 Stanley Street (the family moved to No 32 sometime after 1911) where living with their parents (and 9 x other siblings). In 1911, Andrew was employed as a Grocers Assistant, and Adam was employed as a Blacksmith's Assistant. Both brothers had enlisted in the British Army at Blyth (Soldiers Died refers). The bodies of neither soldier were ever recovered from the battlefield of the Somme, France, where they were killed in 1916. Their supreme sacrifice is however commemorated in perpetuity in both France and the United Kingdom. In France both brothers are commemorated on memorial panels located at the, Thiepval Memorial, maintained by the Commonwealth War Graves Commission. In the United Kingdom, the brothers are further commemorated in their home town, on a Great War Memorial panel located at, St Cuthberts Church, Wellington Street, Plessey Road, Blyth, Northumberland, and upon the local Blyth Great War Memorial located at Ridley park
a). Corporal Andrew James Elliot, 14th Battalion Northumberland Fusiliers, Killed-in-Action, Battle of the Somme, France, 14 July 1916
- 1914-15 Star (10108 Pte A. J. Elliot. North'd Fus:)
- British War Medal. Silver issue (10108 Cpl. A. J. Elliot. North'd Fus.)
- Interallied Victory Medal (10108 Cpl. A. J. Elliot. North'd Fus.)
Medals Verification: The medals all verified as issued per the respective medal rolls of the Northumberland Fusiliers as under:
- 1914-15 Star: Reference WO 329/2621 (landed France, 9 September 1915)
- British War & Interallied Victory Medals: Reference WO 329/691
At the time of his death, Corporal Elliot was 20 years of age
b). Private Adam Sherlaw Elliot, 1/7th Battalion Northumberland Fusiliers, Killed-in-Action, Battle of the Somme, France, 14 November 1916
- British War Medal. Silver issue (7-3658 Pte. A. S. Elliot. North'd Fus.)
- Interallied Victory Medal (7-3658 Pte. A. S. Elliott. North'd Fus.)
Medals Verification: The two medals verified as the recipients only medal entitlement per the recipients Medal Index Card and respective medal roll of the Northumberland Fusiliers as under:
At the time of his death, Private Elliot was 19 years of age
All medals retaining original mostly long bright lengths of silk moire ribands (one BWM riband has been shortened only)
Sold together with some copied hard-copy research including entries from Soldiers Died, Medal Index Cards & CWGC
Condition: All medals EF


text:
Break My Heart may refer to:
 "Break My Heart" (Hilary Duff song) (2005)
 "Break My Heart" (Victoria Duffield song) (2012)
 "Break My Heart" (Estelle song) (2011)
 "Break My Heart" (Todrick Hall song) (2018)
 "Break My Heart" (Hey Violet song) (2017)
 "Break My Heart" (Dua Lipa song) (2020)
 "Break My Heart" (Malcolm Middleton song) (2005)
 "Break My Heart (You Really)", a 1988 song by Shakespears Sister

See also
 "Break Your Heart", a 2009 song by Taio Cruz
 "Un-Break My Heart", a 1996 song by Toni Braxton

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


text:
Government Contracts Awardee Shouldn't Have Been Included in Competitive Range
Awardee Shouldn't Have Been Included in Competitive Range
A contract award for technical and administrative support services was arbitrary and capricious, the Court of Federal Claims ruled, because the government improperly included the awardee in the competitive range, unreasonably evaluated the awardee's proposal under the staffing plan and key personnel factor, and treated the offerors unequally. The request for proposals restricted competition to participants in the 8(a) Business Development program. Also, the RFP contained the limitation on subcontracting clause (FAR 52.219-14), which required the offeror/contractor to agree that "[a]t least 50 percent of the cost of contract performance incurred for personnel shall be expended for employees of the concern." The court first found the awardee's initial proposal, which indicated that the prime contractor would only be completing 40 percent of the work, did not comply with the clause. Ignoring the non-responsiveness of the awardee's bid and including it in the competitive range was improper.
Unreasonable Evaluation. Further, the court found the awardee's "superior" rating under the staffing plan and key personnel factor was inconsistent with the terms of the RFP. The awardee's proposal was silent as to its experience and capabilities in the recruiting, hiring, and employee retention areas, and it instead relied on the capabilities of its large business subcontractor. To merit a "superior" rating under the staffing plan and key personnel evaluation factor, an offeror had to have "exceptional strengths that would significantly benefit the [g]overnment" and a very low risk of unsuccessful performance, but the protester's proposal was not almost devoid of risk. The awardee operated out of a private residence, with only three employees, one of whom was a full-time student. Also, notwithstanding the skills of its subcontractor, the awardee had limited relevant past experience. This was directly contrary to the RFP requirements.
Disparate Treatment. Since the awardee's original proposal did not conform to the RFP's limitation on subcontracting and staffing plan requirements, it should not have been included in the competitive range. However, the government continued in its unfair and unequal treatment by failing to provide a rational explanation for including the awardee in the competitive range, instead opting to reevaluate the proposals to "further tip the scales against [the protester]." This decision "smack[ed] of disparate treatment." The government relaxed its requirements by including the awardee in the competitive range, and it provided no cognizable rationale for its unequal treatment of offerors. Since the government's "failure to articulate any basis for its disparate treatment … renders [a] procurement fundamentally irrational and invalid," the court held the contract award was arbitrary and capricious and granted the protester permanent injunctive relief. (2M Research Services, LLC v. U.S., et al., FedCl, 62 CCF ¶81,466).


text:
using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Linq;
using System.Text;
using System.Threading.Tasks;
using BusinessObjects;
using AutoMapper;
using System.Configuration;

namespace DataObjects.Linq2Sql
{
    // Data access object for Category
    // ** DAO Pattern

    public class CategoryDao : ICategoryDao
    {
        static CategoryDao()
        {
            Mapper.CreateMap<Category, BusinessObjects.Category>();
        }

        public List<BusinessObjects.Category> GetCategories()
        {
            using (var context = DataContextFactory.CreateContext())
            {
                var categories = context.Categories.ToList();
                return Mapper.Map<List<Category>, List<BusinessObjects.Category>>(categories);
            }
        }

        public BusinessObjects.Category GetCategoryByProduct(int productId)
        {
            using (var context = DataContextFactory.CreateContext())
            {
                var category = context.Categories.SelectMany(c => context.Products
                    .Where(p => c.CategoryId == p.CategoryId)
                    .Where(p => p.ProductId == productId),
                     (c, p) => c).SingleOrDefault(c => true);

                return Mapper.Map<Category, BusinessObjects.Category>(category);
            }
        }
    }
}


text:
Atomic structure of ultrathin Co layer on Si(001) (2 × 1) at room temperature
W. S. Cho, J. Y. Kim, N. G. Park, I. W. Lyo, KwangHo Jeong, S. S. Kim, D. S. Choi, C. N. Whang, K. H. Chae
The atomic structure of Co on the Si(001) (2 × 1) surface is investigated by coaxial impact collision ion scattering spectroscopy. When 0.6 ML Co atoms are deposited on the Si(001) at room temperature, the deposited Co atoms reside two-dimensionally on the Si(001) surface. The first preferential adsorption site is T4, and the next favorable site is HB, with a height of 2.72 Å and 3.47 Å from the second Si(001) layer, respectively. As the coverage increases up to 1.9 ML, Co atoms occupy the HB and T3 sites, of which the latter is at a height of 3.58 Å from the second layer of the Si(001) surface.
ion scattering
Cho, W. S., Kim, J. Y., Park, N. G., Lyo, I. W., Jeong, K., Kim, S. S., ... Chae, K. H. (2000). Atomic structure of ultrathin Co layer on Si(001) (2 × 1) at room temperature. Surface Science, 453(1-3). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0039-6028(00)00344-7
Cho, W. S. ; Kim, J. Y. ; Park, N. G. ; Lyo, I. W. ; Jeong, KwangHo ; Kim, S. S. ; Choi, D. S. ; Whang, C. N. ; Chae, K. H. / Atomic structure of ultrathin Co layer on Si(001) (2 × 1) at room temperature. In: Surface Science. 2000 ; Vol. 453, No. 1-3.
@article{89aacb0800d24f75aaa5863a14fea7aa,
title = "Atomic structure of ultrathin Co layer on Si(001) (2 × 1) at room temperature",
abstract = "The atomic structure of Co on the Si(001) (2 × 1) surface is investigated by coaxial impact collision ion scattering spectroscopy. When 0.6 ML Co atoms are deposited on the Si(001) at room temperature, the deposited Co atoms reside two-dimensionally on the Si(001) surface. The first preferential adsorption site is T4, and the next favorable site is HB, with a height of 2.72 {\AA} and 3.47 {\AA} from the second Si(001) layer, respectively. As the coverage increases up to 1.9 ML, Co atoms occupy the HB and T3 sites, of which the latter is at a height of 3.58 {\AA} from the second layer of the Si(001) surface.",
author = "Cho, {W. S.} and Kim, {J. Y.} and Park, {N. G.} and Lyo, {I. W.} and KwangHo Jeong and Kim, {S. S.} and Choi, {D. S.} and Whang, {C. N.} and Chae, {K. H.}",
journal = "Surface Science",
Cho, WS, Kim, JY, Park, NG, Lyo, IW, Jeong, K, Kim, SS, Choi, DS, Whang, CN & Chae, KH 2000, 'Atomic structure of ultrathin Co layer on Si(001) (2 × 1) at room temperature', Surface Science, vol. 453, no. 1-3. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0039-6028(00)00344-7
Atomic structure of ultrathin Co layer on Si(001) (2 × 1) at room temperature. / Cho, W. S.; Kim, J. Y.; Park, N. G.; Lyo, I. W.; Jeong, KwangHo; Kim, S. S.; Choi, D. S.; Whang, C. N.; Chae, K. H.
In: Surface Science, Vol. 453, No. 1-3, 10.05.2000.
T1 - Atomic structure of ultrathin Co layer on Si(001) (2 × 1) at room temperature
AU - Cho, W. S.
AU - Kim, J. Y.
AU - Park, N. G.
AU - Lyo, I. W.
AU - Jeong, KwangHo
AU - Kim, S. S.
AU - Choi, D. S.
AU - Whang, C. N.
AU - Chae, K. H.
N2 - The atomic structure of Co on the Si(001) (2 × 1) surface is investigated by coaxial impact collision ion scattering spectroscopy. When 0.6 ML Co atoms are deposited on the Si(001) at room temperature, the deposited Co atoms reside two-dimensionally on the Si(001) surface. The first preferential adsorption site is T4, and the next favorable site is HB, with a height of 2.72 Å and 3.47 Å from the second Si(001) layer, respectively. As the coverage increases up to 1.9 ML, Co atoms occupy the HB and T3 sites, of which the latter is at a height of 3.58 Å from the second layer of the Si(001) surface.
AB - The atomic structure of Co on the Si(001) (2 × 1) surface is investigated by coaxial impact collision ion scattering spectroscopy. When 0.6 ML Co atoms are deposited on the Si(001) at room temperature, the deposited Co atoms reside two-dimensionally on the Si(001) surface. The first preferential adsorption site is T4, and the next favorable site is HB, with a height of 2.72 Å and 3.47 Å from the second Si(001) layer, respectively. As the coverage increases up to 1.9 ML, Co atoms occupy the HB and T3 sites, of which the latter is at a height of 3.58 Å from the second layer of the Si(001) surface.
JO - Surface Science
JF - Surface Science
Cho WS, Kim JY, Park NG, Lyo IW, Jeong K, Kim SS et al. Atomic structure of ultrathin Co layer on Si(001) (2 × 1) at room temperature. Surface Science. 2000 May 10;453(1-3). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0039-6028(00)00344-7