Dreamer Easy

Fact-checking resources:

Reality Check from BBC News

bellingcat.com


New Nuclear Power Plants Are Unlikely to Stop the Climate Crisis (Scientific American, February 2022). "These plants take too long to build and bring online, and we don’t have that much time."

The 7 reasons why nuclear energy is not the answer to solve climate change (Heinrich Böll Stiftung, April 2021)

Scientists Say GMO Foods Are Safe, Public Skepticism Remains (National Geographic, May 2016). Is safety a red herring? "But the academy also found that GE or (genetically-modified organisms or GMO) crops didn’t increase those crops' potential yields, and they did lead to widespread and expensive problems with herbicide-resistant weeds." (emphasis mine). What's the point, then? (Potentially, nutrient content.)

Make extreme wealth extinct: it’s the only way to avoid climate breakdown (Guardian, November 2021) | Global rich must cut their carbon footprint 97% to stave off climate change, UN says (CBS, December 2020) "The richest 1% would need to reduce their current emissions by at least a factor of 30, while per capita emissions of the poorest 50% could increase by around three times their current levels on average."

Permaculture and the Myth of Overpopulation (Fr John Peck, January 2016). I know nothing of permaculture, but the points in this essay chimed with me. The reminder that this mess is not inevitable and that perhaps humans can and should survive was welcome.


Humans are hardwired to dismiss (coronavirus) facts that don't fit their worldview (LiveScience, July 2020). "Our ancestors evolved in small groups, where cooperation and persuasion had at least as much to do with reproductive success as holding accurate factual beliefs about the world. Assimilation into one's tribe required assimilation into the group's ideological belief system — regardless of whether it was grounded in science or superstition."

Mask-Shaming Won’t Work. Try These 5 Things Instead (Yes!, July 2020). Advice useful for any polarised debate.

Heightened susceptibility to misinformation linked to reduced mask wearing and social distancing (PsyPost, October 2020). "Reflective and analytical thinking" is our best hope.

How social media influencer tactics help conspiracy theories gain traction online (ABC, December 2020) Influences and conspiracy theorists are businesses out to make money, and do it through similar marketing strategies.

The new coronavirus and racist tropes (CJR, January 2020).

Cory Doctorow: Fake News Is an Oracle (July 2019). The problem of conspiracy theories in a world of conspiracies.

How to Convince Someone When Facts Fail (Scientific American, January 2017).

Are Americans as stupid as we seem on Twitter? (Forward, May 2020). On slogans.

How does your body respond to feelings of moral outrage? Depends on your politics (Neuroscience News, January 2020).

The Lazy Poor or the Entitled Rich? (Psychology Today, March 2020) "A psychological perspective on wealth, merit, and compassion."

Closed-minded cognition: Right-wing authoritarianism is negatively related to belief updating following prediction error (Psychonomic Bulletin & Review volume 27, 2020). Right-wing authoritarian views make it harder to change your mind given new evidence.

Supporters of religious violence are more likely to claim they’re familiar with religious concepts that don’t exist (PsyPost, August 2020)

The Root of All Cruelty? (The New Yorker, November 2017). What if, rather than dehumanising our victims, we see them precisely as human beings who are justified targets of our violence?

Furry Panic Is the Latest Dumb GOP Attack on Public Schools (Daily Beast, February 2022). Rumours about special treatment for furries etc in US schools are proxies for attacks on the more usual groups, and on schools themselves.


Science fiction, with a taste of the Twilight Zone: When You Die on the Radio by Adam R. Shannon.


And finally (image not mine):

By now you've probably heard that a refugee took his own life on Manus Island yesterday. He was a Rohingya, had been found to be a genuine refugee, and had epilepsy, for which he had not received treatment for two years despite urgent requests from the medical community. In my view, the Australian government is not just responsible for this man's death; they are responsible for his murder.

In an odd coincidence, I had just finished reading the following article about the Rohingya when I logged on to share the link and read the news from Manus: Murderous Majorities (New York Review of Books, 18 January 2018). It positions the genocide against the Rohingya in Myanmar in the context of majoritarian politics in South Asia. I think it contains a warning for the West: "Majoritarianism insists on different tiers of citizenship. Members of the majority faith and culture are viewed as the nation’s true citizens. The rest are courtesy citizens, guests of the majority, expected to behave well and deferentially." That idea, that some Australians are more equal than others, is strikingly familiar.

More on the Rohingya:

Understanding the Rohingya Refugee Crisis (MSF, 2 January 2018)

Explainer: Who are the Rohingya Muslims? (SBS, 24 October 2017)

The Genocide of Rohingyas in Myanmar from the Australian Migrant Prison on Manus Island (Funambulist Nov/Dec 2017), reproduced by Manus refugee Imran Mohammad in his Facebook.

Faces of the Rohingya (SBS, n.d.). Interviews with Rohingya people living in Melbourne.

On an unrelated note, my ego swelled at the discovery that a letter of mine to the paper (almost certainly the Sydney Morning Herald) about the Tampa was reproduced in a 2007 thesis about Iranian immigrants and refugees. Letters to the editor - especially if they're concise and factual - are an excellent way to get pro-human rights viewpoints in front of readers.

Muslims and Islam: Key findings in the U.S. and around the world (Pew Research Center, 9 August 2017)

How liars create the illusion of truth (Mind Hacks, 11 November, 2016). "Repetition makes a fact seem more true, regardless of whether it is or not. Understanding this effect can help you avoid falling for propaganda, says psychologist Tom Stafford."

I used to think Australia had no history of slavery. It becomes ever more obvious I was wrong. Queensland class action over unpaid wages for Indigenous people 'setting a national precedent' (ABC, 23 September 2016).  | Blackbirding: Australia's history of luring, tricking and kidnapping Pacific Islanders (ABC, 17 September 2017) | Australians 'just starting to wake up' to historical South Sea Islander slavery: Jeff McMullen (ABC, 18 September 2017) | ETA: Slavery claims as seasonal workers from Vanuatu paid nothing for months' work (SMH, 27 March 2017)

Right-Wing Extremists Are a Bigger Threat to America Than ISIS (Newsweek, 4 February 2016) | Globally, terrorism is on the rise - but little of it occurs in Western countries (ABC, 17 November 2015)

Study shows discrimination interacts with genetics and impacts health (Medical XPress, 21 December 2016). The most striking, and I think heartbreaking, thing about this study is the finding that discrimination against your friends and family was more damaging than discrimination against yourself. | Research finds daily discrimination sickens African-Americans (Medical XPress, 21 December 2016)

Hard-wired: The brain's circuitry for political belief (phys.org, 23 December 2016) "Political beliefs are like religious beliefs in the respect that both are part of who you are and important for the social circle to which you belong... To consider an alternative view, you would have to consider an alternative version of yourself."

The Human Zoo: Documentary sheds light on stolen Aboriginal people 'treated as animals' (ABC, 28 January 2017). The horror of Indigenous Australians kidnapped and displayed as exhibits leaves me speechless.

Frankly, I'm knackered. Here goes:

btw, you get a lot of US stuff in this lj partly because the US dominates the Web, partly because I married an American and visit the country regularly, and partly because what happens in the US often influences or is relevant to what happens in Australia. For example, while racism Down Under and Up Over has different histories and characters, there's still a lot in common between them. So IMHO Reverend Denise Anderson's remarks about the shooting of young Black men by US police also have something to say to Australians:I think these words are especially relevant given the frightening return of One Nation. The response of many Australians is to jeer at Pauline Hanson's supporters as "rednecks". This is not quite the same thing as recognising our own racism, but would it be more effective to come down from the moral high ground and engage One Nation voters with a little respect and a lot of facts?

Muslims on what it's like to live in Australia (SMH, 2 May 2016) Pretty tough, and it's only going to get tougher. :(

How Long and Short Senate Terms are Allocated After a Double Dissolution (ABC, 25 April 2016) Antony Green elucidates the complexities.


Now some stuff from other countries.

Islamic State fighters caught in Iraq reveal motivations for jihad (ABC, 13 July 2016) Even this brief glimpse demonstrates that Daesh is about much more than fanatical belief. (Cf: Persecution pushing young Australian Muslims to the margins of society, says leader (SMH, 10 April 2015); The more we fear Islam, the greater the danger from terrorists (SMH, 16 May 2015)).

How one 'super-spreader' was responsible for nearly half of South Korean MERS cases (SMH, 12 July 2016)

South Korea covered up mass abuse, killings of 'vagrants' (AP, 19 April 2016) The way the victims of this "clean-up" for the 1988 Olympics were treated reminds me unsettlingly of descriptions of prison camps in North Korea.

Malawi's albinos at risk of 'total extinction,' U.N. warns (CNN, 1 May 2016) They are butchered for witchcraft purposes. Fucking hell.

Muslim anti-Isis march not covered by mainstream media outlets, say organisers (The Independent, 9 December 2015) Cut out and keep for the next time someone says Muslims don't speak out enough.

I'm on the Kill List. This is what it feels like to be hunted by drones (The Independent, 12 April 2016) "Friends decline my invitations and I have taken to sleeping outside under the trees, to avoid becoming a magnet of death for my family." Would that this was the SF it sounds like.

Somali refugee in critical condition after setting herself alight on Nauru (GA, 3 May 2016) "Hodan was forcibly returned to Nauru only last Wednesday. She was seriously injured in a motorcycle accident on Nauru last November, and was brought to Australia for medical treatment. In the early hours of the morning last Wednesday, Australian Border Force guards carried her out of the Brisbane immigration transit accommodation (Bita) holding her by her arms and legs as she screamed to be allowed to stay... Hodan’s self-immolation was her second attempt at suicide since being returned to the island."

We have murdered this woman.

Omid Masoumali, refugee who died after setting himself on fire, 'suffered without medical care' (ABC, 2 May 2016) "An Iranian refugee who died after setting himself on fire at the Nauru detention centre was without doctor's care for two hours at the medical facility and lay in agony for a further eight hours before morphine was administered, his wife says."

We have murdered this man.

Omid Masoumali set himself on fire after UNHCR told him he would remain on Nauru, asylum seekers say (ABC, 2 May 2015) Three or more other refugees also tried to take their own lives after the UNHCR told them they would have to stay on Nauru for another ten years.

"These actions are purely and simply being taken because they believe that political protests will influence the Australian Government and possibly help them gain entry to Australia", says Nauru.

WE ARE KILLING THESE PEOPLE, YOU FUCKS.

Oh, and by the way:

Widow of refugee who set himself alight 'being kept in hotel and denied a lawyer' (GA, 2 May 2016). "You know I'm grieving and I need to cry but as soon as I want to cry they give me pills or injections to keep me calm. They don’t want my voice to be raised or heard by others. They want me to be emotionless and inactive."

Motherfuckers.

ETA: UNHCR Calls for Immediate Movement of Refugees and Asylum-Seekers to Humane Conditions (UNHCR press release, 2 May 2016)

태극기 휘날리며 (Taegeukgi Hwinallimyeo) aka Taegukgi, directed by Kang Je-gyu, starring Jang Dong-gun and Won Bin as two brothers drafted into the South Korean army at the time of the Korean War*.

For me, this movie was too sentimental to be really great. Having said that, I've never seen anything which so powerfully showed what war is: chaos. Men desperately trying to reduce each other's bodies, these orderly configurations of parts, to randomised shreds and chunks. On and off the battlefield, this breakdown in the order of the body is mirrored by the breakdown of law, morality, and simple fairness, with the summary executions of POWs and civilians; and finally by brutal madness.

The other thing I want to mention is the film's recreation of pre-war Seoul - a big town, with signs in Chinese characters (Hanja?), people wearing traditional dress, etc. By the end of the movie the place is wrecked, of course, but there are signs of hope, such as an open-air school in the rubble.

(I've now seen enough Korean movies and TV that I'm starting to recognise actors. There's a chap in this who was also in Chuno, and Bin Woo was the ajusshi in Ajusshi (aka The Man From Nowhere.)

* Turns out this is what the war is called in SK as well as the Anglosphere. (Did they get the term from us?) Compare what the Vietnam War is called in Vietnam: the American War.

Cut-and-pasted from my Tumblr. :)

It's been years since I sat down and read a whole book in a day. Historian Ronald Takaki's 1995 book Hiroshima: Why America Dropped the Atomic Bomb makes a strong, concise argument, based on historical documents such as diaries, letters, and memoirs, that the bomb was not dropped with the intention of ending the war and saving lives, but as a show of force aimed at America's rival, Russia.

Being a historical ignoramus, I've long wondered about the reasoning behind the destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Reading Professor Takaki's book was prompted by my encounter with this posting and its inappropriately smug, if I'm honest mixture of important points and odd mistakes.

The book supports some of the statements in that posting, while undercutting others, including the original image from White Is: Germany was the original planned target for the atomic bomb, in response to a perceived German nuclear threat. (Germany surrendered in May before the first successful A-bomb test in July, so I suppose we'll never know if the US would have gone through with it.)

On to Takaki's core argument.

President Truman's statement that dropping the bombs saved "half a million" American lives is contradicted by the actual estimates provided to him in June 1945 by the Joint War Plans Committee for the invasion plan: 40,000 killed, not 500,000. The total expected to be killed, wounded, or missing was 193,500, still well short of "half a million".

General Eisenhower, in command of Allied forces in Western Europe, opposed the use of the bomb: Japan was all but defeated and seeking a dignified surrender, so dropping the bomb was "unncessary" and "no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives". General MacArthur, commander in the Pacific, was not consulted about the bomb's use, and called it "completely unnecessary from a military point of view". He, too, regarded the Japanese as already defeated. Admiral Leahy thought even the invasion wouldn't be necessary.

Keen to end the war, the Japanese asked Moscow to negotiate a conditional surrender on their behalf, one in which the emperor would retain his position. Despite a plan approved by the Joint Chiefs of Staff to offer this compromise, the President insisted on the "unconditional surrender" that had become a slogan popular with the public.

Takaki argues that the real purpose behind dropping the bomb was to demonstrate to Stalin that the US now possessed atomic weapons. Truman was to meet with Stalin and Churchill in Potsdam for negotiations; that meeting was delayed, and work on the Trinity test sped up, so that Truman was able to boast to Stalin of the successful test at the Potsdam meeting. At the same meeting, Secretary of State Byrnes advised the President that exploding an atomic bomb in anger could help to intimidate Russia. This was part of a general strategy of demonstrating US military power to the Soviets (the massive firebombing of Berlin and Dresden, which paved the way for Hiroshima and Nagasaki, had earlier been part of the same strategy). Director Groves, leader of the Manhattan Project, similarly understood that "Russia was our enemy, and the Project was conducted on that basis."

IMHO, Takaki makes a powerful case that the most common justification for using the atomic bomb is incorrect. However - to return to the real topic of the original posting - he devotes a chapter to the importance of the "racialization" of the Japanese enemy in the decision to drop the bomb. By the time of the war, anti-Japanese racism had been an ugly part of American culture for decades; with Pearl Harbour, it exploded into a vicious, dehumanising frenzy.

As Takaki points out, in Europe, it was the Nazis who were the enemy, not the Germans, and they were not characterised as subhuman vermin who should be exterminated. I knew a little about the cruelties inflicted by Japanese soldiers - similarly indoctrinated with racial hatred - on their enemies; I didn't know that US soldiers took body parts as trophies. (tbh, this short chapter knocked the breath out of me.) Combining these attitudes with the statements of some military leaders - "For us, THERE ARE NO CIVILIANS IN JAPAN." - makes it easy to believe that, given the choice between nuking Dresden and nuking Hiroshima, the US would have chosen the latter.

Let me end on a couple of points. Firstly, throughout the book, Takaki quotes military leaders, political advisors, and scientists who opposed the use of the bomb (or suggested alternatives, such as a demonstration or use on a strictly military target) not just on strategic grounds but on moral grounds. Thank gods. Secondly, two things about Nagasaki, which was destroyed just two days after the first bomb was used. With Hiroshima utterly destroyed, cutting off all communications, it's possible the Japanese simply didn't have enough time to surrender. And this: Truman didn't know the second bomb was going to be dropped (at least, not so soon); he immediately ordered the military not to drop a third. Blimey!


ETA: Hiroshima atomic bombing did not lead to Japanese surrender, historians argue nearing 70th anniversary (ABC, 5 August 2015)

Amnesty accuses Israel over Gaza. Hamas, too. The Amnesty report is available online: Operation "Cast Lead": 22 days of death and destruction

Israel draws up strategy for PR offensive: "It is not enough for Israel to say that it wants peace. You must also say that you are not a thief. We did not steal another people's land. That is the core of this conflict."

Speaking for myself, I actually don't really care about any of that. All I care about is people blowing up each others' kids, right now. As AI points out, though, both sides use politics and history as their excuse for randomly killing civilians. Either there's something wrong with me or I'm taking a particular philosophical approach that I don't know the name of.

In any case, Israel could pull off a PR coup right now simply by allowing Gazans access to water, sanitation, and medical care.

"Dr. Tiller's slaying is the most recent in a string of murders in the service of the anti-abortion cause, and hundreds of people have been injured or threatened because they provide legal abortion services. Bringing the killers to justice is not enough - the Justice Department and the Department of Homeland Security must root out and prosecute as domestic terrorists and violent racketeers the criminal enterprise that has organized and funded criminal acts for decades. We call on the new attorney general Eric Holder and head of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano to treat these murders in the same way they would treat politically-motivated domestic terrorism of any other kind and put the full resources of their two departments behind that effort."
- NOW press release, 1 June 2009 (my emphasis)

Big Bad Bully: a Psychology Today article from 1995 explains the basics, focussing on bullying by boys. Hmm, this is interesting: "Bullies, for the most part, are different from you and me. Studies reliably show that they have a distinctive cognitive make-up—a hostile attributional bias, a kind of paranoia. They perpetually attribute hostile intentions to others. The trouble is, they perceive provocation where it does not exist. That comes to justify their aggressive behavior." That certainly fits the indignant "she asked for it" mentality of a lot of ugly behaviour I've seen online.

Everyone Loves a Bully: PT again, 2004. "[Psychologist Jaana] Juvonen thinks that intervention must address a social system that privileges bullies, rather than simply targeting individual perpetrators. 'No matter how you teach bullies to see their world differently, the rewards of the behavior are still there once they step back into the schoolyard,' Juvonen says. Teaching children not to applaud antagonizers by giving them attention can change social expectations and norms. 'Empowering them to intervene in bullying situations would be by far the most effective strategy.'"

Cyberbullying grows bigger and meaner with photos, video "When they put it on the Internet, it's like they took everything and multiplied it by an astronomical number. It's one thing if it's a mean thing that somebody put in my school paper because that's contained within a small area. Only a certain number of people will see that. But when you put it on the Internet, you are opening it up to everyone in the world." It wrecks lives, as Wired magazine details in a report about "the Internet Fury Machine".

Beyond the Schoolyard: stories of cyberbullying in Canada. (David Knight's family are suing the high school which failed to protect him from constant violence. Give 'em hell, mate, on behalf of all of us.)

False rumours spread online by a workmate drive a Korean woman to suicide

UK sites School Bully OnLine and Kidscape have lots of stuff.

Bullying explained for kids aged 6-12

As Good as Your Words?: NYT, 1998. "The studies suggest that when someone says something, good or bad, about someone else, people tend to associate that trait with the person who made the statement. So if someone calls another person dishonest, other people tend to remember the speaker as being less than honest." This presents a bit of a problem for peeps who enjoy ripping others to shreds, especially if they're hoping to make themselves look good.

Finally: I linked to this report last year, but wanted to quote this bit: The Real Scoop on Rumors and Gossip: "It doesn't necessarily matter if gossip is true or not. Its goal is to change and maintain clusters of people, either by shifting around a social structure or spreading ideas about what is normal behavior." (Or, as the Rules of the Internet put it: "Anything you say can and will be used against you. Anything you say can be turned into something else.")

ETA: New Scientist, March 2009: Some schools may be breeding grounds for teen killers: "Shootings appear more likely in schools characterised by a high degree of social stratification and low bonding and attachment between teachers and students. They provide rewards and recognition for only an elite few, and create social dynamics that promote disrespectful behaviour, bullying, and peer harassment." (Thanks for the link, lillibet!)

ETA: Stonewall UK has facts and figures on Homophobic bullying in schools. 41% of targets were cyberbullied. (You don't have to be queer to be a target; I was "Hey, lemon!" for the last two years of high school. Thanks for the link, nyssa1968!)