Proserpina: Racism. That's the one topic where some people don't consider the Right sincere. "Racism is wrong, sure, but not criminal. I won't force someone to do business with or hire people they don't want to." I'm hearing from alot of Libs and it becomes difficult to form a lasting conversation because their model excludes the idea of the majority of institituions actively oppressing you.
"Libertarians are fundementally against racism."
"Okay, but when most banks redline Blacks, who is going to stop it?"
"Don't do business with those banks. They will suffer for excluding you. :D"
"Fine, so then where do Blacks get loans? Buy homes?"
".... :("
Rep-Lib: Pay cash? Why do blacks or anyone have to go into debt. The only color that matters in this county is green! ;o)
Proserpina: That's a nice joke. Atleast i hope it's a joke.
Rep-Lib: Actually, paying cash is extremely realistic. It's all about behavior. Don't get me wrong the system is stacked against minorities, this much is true, but that shouldn't stop any person from getting out of poverty and creating the life that they so choose, aka the pursuit of happiness.
To be clear, I'm not a libertarian so I couldn't answer what a libertarian would do. I am a Republican in the true sense of the word.
Proserpina: Millions could buy a house or car with cash?... Whatever. Fine then. What would a republican do about redlining, generational poverty and everything else that is systematically caused by people's refusal to work together?
Rep-Lib: Create an even playing field by holding companies responsible, by not allowing monopolies. That's a start. Create a better tax system that doesn't tax production but rather consumption. Defend the Constitution and the Republic by not allowing European democracy, aka socialism (welfarism, communism, etc.) to take over our economy and political system. Go back to a pure laissez-faire Capitalist economy rather than a mixed socialist/capitalist economy.
Proserpina: What do monopolies have to do with companies discriminating because of race or gender? What does ANY of that have to do with anything?
Rep-Lib: Monopolies derive there power from being the top dog, with little to no competition, which means they can be racist if they want to because no one can stop them. When there are other options available, people in general, will typically go with the company that offers the best deal, or customer service or whatever reason they choose.
This same principle goes for any company, including banks. As long as there is competition available then people will choose to go with the company that best suits there needs. If one bank or company is racist then most people wouldn't bank there, you know besides the racist, and therefore they would probably go out of business. So it's counter productive in the business world to care about the color of ones skin or the there heritage or gender or anything like that.
Proserpina: .... Right. So, what monopolies, in finance or anything else, is to blame for America's active oppression of non-whites?
Rep-Lib: My goodness. Is this really about race? Where do you see racism today? What bank doesn't allow a black people to get a loan? It sounds like you want reparations, is that where we are headed?
Proserpina: Just because you are making up things and not basing your reasoning on history doesn't make me a radical Black. I would love to know what banks lost white clients because they were redlining blacks.
PLEASE don't taint this conversation as many have done by going down the "LOL, WHAT YOU WANT REPARATIONS? WHAT, ARE YOU A COMMUNIST? LOL" road. I've been very clear about what I'm asking. Systematic action to combat systematic action. If you don't think redlining and blockbusting should be illegal, just SAY what you, or more generally, Republicans would do to get Blacks the loans they need to buy their houses, their cars, their businesses, their livelihoods...
Subscribe To
Posts
All Comments
Monday, March 8, 2010
Friday, March 5, 2010
Communism Values
Getting Good Points on What Communism Is:
(Urg, I'm getting sick of these guys. I'm going to move on to something else soon enough. Probably after Spring Break.)
What We Fight For
Progressive Labor Party (PLP) fights to smash capitalism -- wage slavery. While the bosses and their mouthpieces claim "communism is dead:" capitalism is the real failure for billions all over the world. Capitalism returned to the Soviet Union and China because socialism failed to wipe out many aspects of the profit system, like wages and division of labor.
Capitalism inevitably leads to wars. PLP organizes workers, students and soldiers to turn these wars into a revolution for communism -- the dictatorship of the proletariat. This fight requires a mass Red Army led by the communist PLP.
Communism means working collectively to build a society where sharing is based on need. We will abolish work for wages, money and profits. Everyone will share in society's benefits and burdens.
Communism means abolishing racism and the concept of race.
Communism means abolishing the special oppression of women workers.
Communism means abolishing nations and nationalism. One International working class, one world, one Party.
Communism means the Party leads every aspect of society. For this to work, millions of workers -- eventually everyone -- must become communist organizers. Join Us!
(Urg, I'm getting sick of these guys. I'm going to move on to something else soon enough. Probably after Spring Break.)
What We Fight For
Progressive Labor Party (PLP) fights to smash capitalism -- wage slavery. While the bosses and their mouthpieces claim "communism is dead:" capitalism is the real failure for billions all over the world. Capitalism returned to the Soviet Union and China because socialism failed to wipe out many aspects of the profit system, like wages and division of labor.
Capitalism inevitably leads to wars. PLP organizes workers, students and soldiers to turn these wars into a revolution for communism -- the dictatorship of the proletariat. This fight requires a mass Red Army led by the communist PLP.
Communism means working collectively to build a society where sharing is based on need. We will abolish work for wages, money and profits. Everyone will share in society's benefits and burdens.
Communism means abolishing racism and the concept of race.
Communism means abolishing the special oppression of women workers.
Communism means abolishing nations and nationalism. One International working class, one world, one Party.
Communism means the Party leads every aspect of society. For this to work, millions of workers -- eventually everyone -- must become communist organizers. Join Us!
Thursday, February 25, 2010
What I Would Hope To Accomplish
After explaining my ideas to my mom, I would like to get even more specific about what I am studying what I would hope to accomplish in the future.
1, I am studying unconventional economic development. Supply-side, human capital, social capital, entrepreneurship.
2, I am asking policy questions about basic human services of people outside of the mainstream, murky policy pool. Communists, socalists, social democrats, radical centerists, libertarians, anarcho-capitalists.
3, I am interviewing local leaders about their experiences with Cleveland, OH and their hopes for the future.
4, I am forming a model of neighborhood-wide, marginal development that encourages ownership, citizenship, and capturing multipling dollars.
5, I am looking for ways to enforce social contracts without the use of government as it is understood presently.
I am using the "24 Necessities" as a launching model for essential firms that are currently underused, overused, misused, or disconnected in neighborhoods. If I can get a working model, I want to break them up into "Urban Hood," "Small Town," "Rural Area," "Underdeveloped," and "Blank Slate".
While I still study in college and freely talk, listen and record, I want to develop directories of Cleveland resources for using my model.
It would be ever so awesome if I could go to graduate school and work on my model seriously, for academic consideration, while experimenting in Cleveland neighborhoods.
1, I am studying unconventional economic development. Supply-side, human capital, social capital, entrepreneurship.
2, I am asking policy questions about basic human services of people outside of the mainstream, murky policy pool. Communists, socalists, social democrats, radical centerists, libertarians, anarcho-capitalists.
3, I am interviewing local leaders about their experiences with Cleveland, OH and their hopes for the future.
4, I am forming a model of neighborhood-wide, marginal development that encourages ownership, citizenship, and capturing multipling dollars.
5, I am looking for ways to enforce social contracts without the use of government as it is understood presently.
I am using the "24 Necessities" as a launching model for essential firms that are currently underused, overused, misused, or disconnected in neighborhoods. If I can get a working model, I want to break them up into "Urban Hood," "Small Town," "Rural Area," "Underdeveloped," and "Blank Slate".
While I still study in college and freely talk, listen and record, I want to develop directories of Cleveland resources for using my model.
It would be ever so awesome if I could go to graduate school and work on my model seriously, for academic consideration, while experimenting in Cleveland neighborhoods.
Monday, February 22, 2010
World's Smallest Political Quiz
My Score from The World's Smallest Political Quiz
CENTRISTS espouse a "middle ground" regarding government control of the economy and personal behavior. Depending on the issue, they sometimes favor government intervention and sometimes support individual freedom of choice.
Centrists pride themselves on keeping an open mind, tend to oppose "political extremes," and emphasize whatvthey describe as "practical" solutions to problems.
In politics, centrism usually refers to the political ideal of promoting moderate policies which land in the middle ground between different political extremes. Most commonly, this is visualized as part of the one-dimensional political spectrum of Left-Right politics, with centrism landing in the middle between left-wing politics and right-wing politics. -- Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia
Centrists are ideologically flexible. Centrists recognize the complexity of public policy choices and look to many kinds of solutions. Which solution depends on the circumstances, the problem, and the public interest. Ideologues repeat their slogans with little regard to the specific policy problem at hand. Conservatives shout "private good, public bad." Liberals shout "public good, private bad." By contrast, the centrist movement can show politicians how to use both the private and public sectors (often in combination) to creatively solve problems that we would otherwise just shout about. -- Centrists.Org
Other Views:
Right (Conservative)
Conservatives tend to favor economic freedom, but frequently support laws to restrict personal behavior that violates "traditional values." They oppose excessive government control of business, while endorsing government action to defend morality and the traditional family structure. Conservatives usually support a strong military, oppose bureaucracy and high taxes, favor a free-market economy, and endorse strong law enforcement.
Left (Liberal)
Liberals usually embrace freedom of choice in personal matters, but tend to support significant government control of the economy. They generally support a government-funded "safety net"
to help the disadvantaged, and advocate strict regulation of business. Liberals tend to favor environmental regulations, defend civil liberties and free expression, support government action to promote equality, and tolerate diverse lifestyles.
Libertarian
Libertarians support maximum liberty in both personal and economic matters. They advocate a much smaller government; one that is limited to protecting individuals from coercion and violence. Libertarians tend to embrace individual responsibility, oppose government bureaucracy and taxes, promote private charity, tolerate diverse lifestyles, support the free market, and defend civil liberties.
Statist (Big Government)
Statists want government to have a great deal of power over the economy and individual behavior. They frequently doubt whether economic liberty and individual freedom are practical options in today's world. Statists tend to distrust the free market, support high taxes and centralized planning of the economy, oppose diverse lifestyles, and question the importance of civil liberties.
http://www.theadvocates.org/quizp/quiz.php
Sunday, February 21, 2010
Research Ideas from Class: Agglomeration in Nonprofits, 3
Backward Linkages
Backward linkages connect firms by channeling their money, information, and materials together.
Why shouldn’t nonprofits that work with similar clients share information and resources? Even profit-seeking businesses do that. Businesses form trade unions and professional associations. They study each other’s movements to spot trends. They recruit the same sort of people, so they watch where fresh workers come from. They have mutual interests and studies have shown that industries thrive when the businesses work together to increase the pie for them all. That way, they are free to specialize and develop distinct identities.
Backward linkages connect firms by channeling their money, information, and materials together.
Why shouldn’t nonprofits that work with similar clients share information and resources? Even profit-seeking businesses do that. Businesses form trade unions and professional associations. They study each other’s movements to spot trends. They recruit the same sort of people, so they watch where fresh workers come from. They have mutual interests and studies have shown that industries thrive when the businesses work together to increase the pie for them all. That way, they are free to specialize and develop distinct identities.
Saturday, February 20, 2010
Research Ideas from Class: Agglomeration in Nonprofits, 2
Forward Linkages
Forward linkages are distribution chains connecting producers/suppliers with customers.
Developing strong forward linkages are important for any nonprofit, but I have seen some not take this process seriously because they were too enthusiastic about getting their service out to people and not about doing it rationally. They throw hundreds of flyers out across an area when developing a relationship with a few local leaders gets information out faster. They try to reach children individually instead of going to the school. They say, “We are inclusive, we want to help everyone!” but they don’t take the time to develop relationships to REACH out to all desired clients, such as writing Spanish versions of their information. Also, to maintain these relationships. High performing programs and plans should be nurtured.
Forward linkages are distribution chains connecting producers/suppliers with customers.
Developing strong forward linkages are important for any nonprofit, but I have seen some not take this process seriously because they were too enthusiastic about getting their service out to people and not about doing it rationally. They throw hundreds of flyers out across an area when developing a relationship with a few local leaders gets information out faster. They try to reach children individually instead of going to the school. They say, “We are inclusive, we want to help everyone!” but they don’t take the time to develop relationships to REACH out to all desired clients, such as writing Spanish versions of their information. Also, to maintain these relationships. High performing programs and plans should be nurtured.
Friday, February 19, 2010
Research Ideas from Class: Agglomeration in Nonprofits, 1
Internal Economies
When a firm expands to cover multiple activities, it reduces cost by internal agglomeration. “The spreading of fixed costs over a larger output, greater division of labor, the potential for using alternative technologies, and saving through bulk purchases are sources of internal agglomeration.” (72) Economies of scales, which is efficiency by size, can also be internal agglomeration by being concentrated in one place.
Internal economies are helpful at spreading fixed costs over larger outputs. Examples are
When a firm expands to cover multiple activities, it reduces cost by internal agglomeration. “The spreading of fixed costs over a larger output, greater division of labor, the potential for using alternative technologies, and saving through bulk purchases are sources of internal agglomeration.” (72) Economies of scales, which is efficiency by size, can also be internal agglomeration by being concentrated in one place.
Internal economies are helpful at spreading fixed costs over larger outputs. Examples are
- Sharing buildings: multi-use, time sharing. Catholic churches have shared their large buildings with other congregations to cut down on paying the costs.
- Sharing equipment: communal resources, labs.
- Sharing infrastructure: roads, connections. Which comes naturally with being in the same location.
- Savings through bulk purchases
- Greater division of labor
Thursday, February 18, 2010
Research Ideas from Class: Agglomeration in Nonprofits, Main
Agglomeration in Nonprofits
Do nonprofits locate near each other and build off each other the same way that service businesses do? Do they internally develop like businesses? What are the location factors for nonprofits?
Could nonprofits gain from internal economies? Could they gain from studying forward and backward linkages? And, can some nonprofits develop into a localized economy that could sustain a small population?
Do nonprofits locate near each other and build off each other the same way that service businesses do? Do they internally develop like businesses? What are the location factors for nonprofits?
Could nonprofits gain from internal economies? Could they gain from studying forward and backward linkages? And, can some nonprofits develop into a localized economy that could sustain a small population?
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
Incorporating Academic into Real World Problems
So I'm taking Urban Economic Development at school and I'm going over exactly the kind of patterns that I want to use in my development model for research. It's exciting shit.
Agglomeration. Localization. Backward and forward linkages. Low order and high order services/goods. Central place theory. Broad strokes that I can get MUCH more specific with by using my 24 necessities as examples. That's alot of research, by the way. But I'm willing to do it to get some good models to build businesses and economies from.
I need to plug these keywords into the college library databases and come up with some precedent. Like Velma Kelly, I just can't do it alone.
Agglomeration. Localization. Backward and forward linkages. Low order and high order services/goods. Central place theory. Broad strokes that I can get MUCH more specific with by using my 24 necessities as examples. That's alot of research, by the way. But I'm willing to do it to get some good models to build businesses and economies from.
I need to plug these keywords into the college library databases and come up with some precedent. Like Velma Kelly, I just can't do it alone.
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
The Twenty-Four Necessities
I'm compiling a list of twelve businesses and twelve non-profits every neighborhood needs to have a high quality of life, strong sense of community and accountability and control. I'll use it to create an economic development model focuses on the needs of households.
Business Suggestions
Non-Profit Suggestions
need more! How are all these different from each other? How do they connect?
What industries surround them? How can we use them to agglomerate more business and industry?
Business Suggestions
- grocery store
- bank/credit union
- minutemen temp agency
- day care
- hospital
- laundry mat
- hardware store
- office space
- furniture store
- diner
- barbershop
- book store
- theater
- coffee shop
- clothing store
- spa/bath house
- office supply store
- dentist
- gym
- hotel
Non-Profit Suggestions
- library
- elementary school
- middle school
- high school
- community center
- temple
- gallery
- park
- post office
- fire station
- police station
- head-start
- museum/historical society
- political party headquarters
- government representatives offices
- free clinic
- settlement house
need more! How are all these different from each other? How do they connect?
What industries surround them? How can we use them to agglomerate more business and industry?
What Keeps Me from My Dreams
I am not focused enough on my work to really get it done. I spend more time wishing to talk to someone so that I don't feel like a freak for obsessing over my work.
Now I am starting to understand that most entrepreneurs don't have someone to talk to--at first. They spend more time working than talking. More time listening to need than talking. More time researching where they fit into the present framework and how they want to change the way the world see's their object of obsession. I'm okay that my mom still doesn't get urban planning.
If I spent half the time researching and listening more to insight than explaining what I think, I would be farther along in building my cities than I am now. Plus, I would actually graduate from college on time.
Here's to a semester of study.
Now I am starting to understand that most entrepreneurs don't have someone to talk to--at first. They spend more time working than talking. More time listening to need than talking. More time researching where they fit into the present framework and how they want to change the way the world see's their object of obsession. I'm okay that my mom still doesn't get urban planning.
If I spent half the time researching and listening more to insight than explaining what I think, I would be farther along in building my cities than I am now. Plus, I would actually graduate from college on time.
Here's to a semester of study.
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
Create Cities, Whole Cities.
Most people don't think their government is accountable to them. Some people don't trust their city government, let alone Ohio or the Feds.
But the point of the police still stands, to ensure safety. You don't think they do that in East Cleveland? Sure, they don't. The people have a high concentration of murders every year. What combats that?
I understand that you may not like how government does things, but the issues they fight are still issues we must fight if we take their power.
I want to create some new cities in Ohio. But, first, I want to create networks of citizen participation. That means citizens deterring crime, citizens creating new businesses, citizens creating new non-profits. And, once I've done that, I'll build a government around financing and legitimizing those choices.
I want to create whole cities.
But the point of the police still stands, to ensure safety. You don't think they do that in East Cleveland? Sure, they don't. The people have a high concentration of murders every year. What combats that?
I understand that you may not like how government does things, but the issues they fight are still issues we must fight if we take their power.
I want to create some new cities in Ohio. But, first, I want to create networks of citizen participation. That means citizens deterring crime, citizens creating new businesses, citizens creating new non-profits. And, once I've done that, I'll build a government around financing and legitimizing those choices.
I want to create whole cities.
What I am Focused On
It is my prevailing view that the tension in today's world is caused by pulling between two forces: the dispiriting shrinkage personal control people have and the growing resentment of being denied this entitlement.
These are opposites, so you would think that they naturally collide, but considering that America is the first true republic-- free of monarchy--, a country less than 250 years old, entitlement to personal control has never been a prevailing worldveiw. Not even during the beginnings of America, when democracy wasn't yet enacted.
Nowadays, people want to be in control of themselves, but they have been lied to by a system that isn't ready to give them that control. The system has led them to believe that radical individualization is the key to that control. The old school wants us to believe that everyone should focus on themselves and if you got yours then I should get mine. In this, we loose all control we have by ignoring why people migrate to cities in the first place: to work together.
By choosing to believe that we are best left to ignoring the needs of others, we loose all control of ourselves and our personal fields because of the chaos of no responsibility. No one feels that anyone is held accountable to anyone. No one can effect anything because everyone is thinking about sustaining themselves. This is pervasive in law enforcement, in government, in business, in banking, in marriage. This is the same reason men abandon their pregnant girlfriends as employers ignore the careers of their employees.
A man has been talking to me about crime. No, he has been talking to me about why he hates police, and I have been talking about crime. Police need to exist. Government needs to exist. But if we can't hold a government accountable, than it is bound to be corrupt. If there are only ten men on a police force and two abuse citizens, than we should be able to fire them and replace them with upstanding men from the neighborhood. On the opposite end are criminals. If in a neighborhood of 100 households, 5 are headed by drug dealers, pimps and mafia. The neighborhood should be able to kick them out. They work the same way, yet this man was mad at me. To him, if a police officer abuses his power, than he's a pig. If a man sells cocaine, he just needs help (because he was obviously only doing this to feed his starving family) and should be rehabilitated. Right.
Either way, a justice system that doesn't respond to real crime and a criminal base that infests the neighborhood have the same root cause, somewhere. My focus is to find that cause and hit its nerve, effecting both problems at the same time. If a person doesn't like the police, understandable, but that doesn't stop criminals from preying on the neighborhood. I spent an hour asking this man what he would do to have citizens deter crime, rehabilitate offenders and punish criminals without prison, when needed. He couldn't give me any answers because all he wanted to talk about was how much he hated police. Fine, than be the police and stop crime.
Do average citizens in crime-infested neighborhoods feel they can tell these people to leave? No! Is it easy? Is it possible? When people feel that the only way they can succeed is by ignoring each other, than they can't work together against people who certainly aren't so unorganized. Turn this on the cops, and you have citizens keeping police accountable for deterring crime in their cities. Can we fire off police as easily as this? Can we fire off cheifs and staff as easily as this? Do our opinions on rehabilitation and sentencing matter? They won't as long as we are so quiet about this as to think we only need to blast open when a dramatic case comes along.
If accountability amongst law enforcement and morality amongst citizens are both important, we must make mechanisms around their importance. They are systems that should already be in place. We need to put them in place. But before that, we need a serious amount of courage to take back the fact that we are all accountable for each other, or else, why live in a city at all?
These are opposites, so you would think that they naturally collide, but considering that America is the first true republic-- free of monarchy--, a country less than 250 years old, entitlement to personal control has never been a prevailing worldveiw. Not even during the beginnings of America, when democracy wasn't yet enacted.
Nowadays, people want to be in control of themselves, but they have been lied to by a system that isn't ready to give them that control. The system has led them to believe that radical individualization is the key to that control. The old school wants us to believe that everyone should focus on themselves and if you got yours then I should get mine. In this, we loose all control we have by ignoring why people migrate to cities in the first place: to work together.
By choosing to believe that we are best left to ignoring the needs of others, we loose all control of ourselves and our personal fields because of the chaos of no responsibility. No one feels that anyone is held accountable to anyone. No one can effect anything because everyone is thinking about sustaining themselves. This is pervasive in law enforcement, in government, in business, in banking, in marriage. This is the same reason men abandon their pregnant girlfriends as employers ignore the careers of their employees.
A man has been talking to me about crime. No, he has been talking to me about why he hates police, and I have been talking about crime. Police need to exist. Government needs to exist. But if we can't hold a government accountable, than it is bound to be corrupt. If there are only ten men on a police force and two abuse citizens, than we should be able to fire them and replace them with upstanding men from the neighborhood. On the opposite end are criminals. If in a neighborhood of 100 households, 5 are headed by drug dealers, pimps and mafia. The neighborhood should be able to kick them out. They work the same way, yet this man was mad at me. To him, if a police officer abuses his power, than he's a pig. If a man sells cocaine, he just needs help (because he was obviously only doing this to feed his starving family) and should be rehabilitated. Right.
Either way, a justice system that doesn't respond to real crime and a criminal base that infests the neighborhood have the same root cause, somewhere. My focus is to find that cause and hit its nerve, effecting both problems at the same time. If a person doesn't like the police, understandable, but that doesn't stop criminals from preying on the neighborhood. I spent an hour asking this man what he would do to have citizens deter crime, rehabilitate offenders and punish criminals without prison, when needed. He couldn't give me any answers because all he wanted to talk about was how much he hated police. Fine, than be the police and stop crime.
Do average citizens in crime-infested neighborhoods feel they can tell these people to leave? No! Is it easy? Is it possible? When people feel that the only way they can succeed is by ignoring each other, than they can't work together against people who certainly aren't so unorganized. Turn this on the cops, and you have citizens keeping police accountable for deterring crime in their cities. Can we fire off police as easily as this? Can we fire off cheifs and staff as easily as this? Do our opinions on rehabilitation and sentencing matter? They won't as long as we are so quiet about this as to think we only need to blast open when a dramatic case comes along.
If accountability amongst law enforcement and morality amongst citizens are both important, we must make mechanisms around their importance. They are systems that should already be in place. We need to put them in place. But before that, we need a serious amount of courage to take back the fact that we are all accountable for each other, or else, why live in a city at all?
Thursday, January 7, 2010
Four Ways for a Police Force
Let's say you had a town of 50,000 people who all agreed to live by once complete system.
What would a police force look like in each of these four systems?
Commune: Complete public ownership, average citizen contributes greatly to management
Social-democracy: Mostly public ownership, large professional government
Conservative-republic: Mostly private ownership, small delegating government
Syndicate: Complete private ownership, average citizen is expected to self-manage
Questions:
1)Privatization of police, anarcho-capitalists? Who would pay for it?
2) How much should the general public and police work together? Block clubs, neighborhood watch?
3) Last month in Cleveland, 11 women were discovered, carved up, in a Black man's house. People were quick to blame the police and call racism. Nine of the women's families never filed missing person's reports. Where does the responsibility lie for the public to enforce the law and look out for each other? How do you cultivate that sense of shared responsibility?
4) How do you mitigate youth violence?
5) How do you mitigate rape and domestic abuse?
6) What drugs are really "victimless". Which are not?
What would a police force look like in each of these four systems?
Commune: Complete public ownership, average citizen contributes greatly to management
Social-democracy: Mostly public ownership, large professional government
Conservative-republic: Mostly private ownership, small delegating government
Syndicate: Complete private ownership, average citizen is expected to self-manage
Questions:
1)Privatization of police, anarcho-capitalists? Who would pay for it?
2) How much should the general public and police work together? Block clubs, neighborhood watch?
3) Last month in Cleveland, 11 women were discovered, carved up, in a Black man's house. People were quick to blame the police and call racism. Nine of the women's families never filed missing person's reports. Where does the responsibility lie for the public to enforce the law and look out for each other? How do you cultivate that sense of shared responsibility?
4) How do you mitigate youth violence?
5) How do you mitigate rape and domestic abuse?
6) What drugs are really "victimless". Which are not?
Thursday, December 31, 2009
Four Ways for a High School
According to the logic on the American spectrum, you have communal, social-democratic, conservative-republic and libertarian living. Each type has different assumptions, expectations and methods for how to manage money, resources and people.
Commune: Complete public ownership, average citizen contributes greatly to management
Social-democracy: Mostly public ownership, large professional government
Conservative-republic: Mostly private ownership, small delegating government
Syndicate: Complete private ownership, average citizen is expected to self-manage
We spend so much time vying for domination and little time building each lifestyle by its goals. So I ask how each system operates and how it tackles different needs. A big one, perhaps the most important one, is education.
Let's say you had a town of 50,000 people who all agreed to live by once complete system.
What would a high school look like in each of these systems?
QUESTIONS:
1) How would parent involvement vary? Which would have the largest amount of home-schooled?
2) How would curriculum vary?
3) Would the syndicate focus more on home economics and personal welfare?
4) Would the communal focus more on interpersonal relations and teamwork?
5) If the republic had its charter schools, would they separate them by special needs -- average -- gifted?
6) Would the democracy focus on public administration more than business?
7) How would the view of science change? Would the more private the system, the more theories are open to interpretation? Would the more social systems want fixed, agreed interpretations?
8) Would liberal arts be more important in a private or social system?
Commune: Complete public ownership, average citizen contributes greatly to management
Social-democracy: Mostly public ownership, large professional government
Conservative-republic: Mostly private ownership, small delegating government
Syndicate: Complete private ownership, average citizen is expected to self-manage
We spend so much time vying for domination and little time building each lifestyle by its goals. So I ask how each system operates and how it tackles different needs. A big one, perhaps the most important one, is education.
Let's say you had a town of 50,000 people who all agreed to live by once complete system.
What would a high school look like in each of these systems?
QUESTIONS:
1) How would parent involvement vary? Which would have the largest amount of home-schooled?
2) How would curriculum vary?
3) Would the syndicate focus more on home economics and personal welfare?
4) Would the communal focus more on interpersonal relations and teamwork?
5) If the republic had its charter schools, would they separate them by special needs -- average -- gifted?
6) Would the democracy focus on public administration more than business?
7) How would the view of science change? Would the more private the system, the more theories are open to interpretation? Would the more social systems want fixed, agreed interpretations?
8) Would liberal arts be more important in a private or social system?
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Review of a Review of The Pursuit of Happyness
Here is the review:
http://wbai.org/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=9437&Itemid=2
My response. lol:
I know, it's late, but I only have one thing to say:
Please take the high-minded stick out of your ass when reviewing your films. Should Chris Gardner have changed his whole life to meet your politically correct expectations?
The point of every romantic tale is that the hero is exceptional and performing outrageous tasks that the audience could only dream of, yet when the story is "Black man gets ahead by tenacity and insane goals," you tell audience, "this film is telling you your poverty is your own fault, that you are lazy." WAIT, WHAT!?
Is Batman's fight against crime saying "It's your fault that crime is rampant in your hood. What's stopping you from putting on a costume and beating up criminals?"
Every paragraph of The Pursuit of Happyness review is dripping with offended scoffing so self-righteous that the reviewer barely cares about the "based on a true story" aspect and, instead, insists that the story is racist, sexist and classist for reasons that would make sense… IF THE STORY WEREN’T TRUE!
"There are no positive female characters. Look! The wife was a shrew!” Yes, because the real Chris Gardner sold off their whole savings on a crappy product. I'd be pissed, too. Am I the only one who felt pity on her and hoped that the real woman kept in touch with her son after all this happened? Were the writers supposed to change Mr. Twissle into a woman?
"This film is manipulating you to dislike the poor because two or three people in Chris's life were not helpful to him, while the white people were. (This is all wrong. White people are always the problem.)" It’s so sad that you are willing to ignore the flaws of the stock brokers just for a chance at some high-brow cross-victimization. Those white men spent half the movie looking pass Chris, barely paying him attention, thinking about their football game, their next appointment or a damn Rubik’s cube. Stiffing him in cab fare, taking his money, pushing him to do chores… Not because he is Black, either, but because he’s an Intern and that’s his lot in life until he rises higher.
And I suppose the kindness of the Glide Memorial Baptist Church, whose Black director played himself in the movie, means nothing to you? The reviewer comments on how “not possible on this planet,” it would be for a man to go into a men’s shelter with a child, but obviously it was little exceptions like this that caused the real Chris Gardner to have the script changed to add him in. “If it weren’t for him, I wouldn’t be here. He had to be in it.”
“Then he could have added in a woman! There had to have been some woman who helped him during this time!” The story is about a man making a life for his son and the review stops to write about how women are portrayed… as if a hippy stealing some gizmo or a girlfriend at the end of her rope is meant to summarize the moral fiber of %51 of our species. (Nevermind that the movie is full of hundreds of real homeless men, ungrateful men, insensitive men, and too-busy-for-you men. HOW can we raise our sons with so many examples of flawed, normal people around them?!)
“All-white, male utopia,” Prairie Miller? Chris Gardner’s moment of Happyness at the end is realizing he can provide for his son again. He runs to the day-care and grasps the boy. But I suppose Christ would need to become Christina for the underlying theme of the story to matter, since “single dad doing whatever it takes to raise his child” isn’t as archetypical as single mothers.
Of course, if it was a story about small town girl Christina, working a no-pay internship, beating out a room of college-educated men, to work in a prestigious firm after being dumped by her boyfriend, kicked out her apartment, forced to live in a Baptist church shelter and running, running, running all over San Francisco with only her skill “with numbers and people” to help her…
But, no, let’s get back to judging Chris for not calling child services or some government agency, which would probably take his boy away, which is the very point of this movie. Chris Gardner wanted to raise his son. Forget even the Rags-to-Riches plot, which is so easy for political-minded dunderheads to fall back on. The man wanted to stay in his child’s life. He reached for anything that could help him and did many stupid, risky, dangerous, foolish things for that goal. Just like every other hero that has ever been worth telling a story about. But that’s a Bad thing in this case, because he is Black, thus his only real options are to revolt against the entirety of America because he’s poor, yet also get on welfare.
I’ve wasted an hour of my life to this letter, wasted time being offended at you for being offended at this, so now I am just sad. In 1984, a Chinese immigrant mistook Happyness for Happiness and that offends you. A black guy you don’t know wasn’t willing to give Chris Gardner $14 and for Chris to mention that in a retelling of his rise from poverty offends you. Portraying flaws in “people of color” piss you off?
Pretentious people piss me off. Being told that by a presidential candidate that “we need more aid for Blacks, Hispanics and poor whites” pisses me off, because I feel like punching the White guy that thinks that “Black and Hispanic” don’t also need adjective qualifiers like “poor”. “Feminist” commentary on “how women are portrayed” pisses me off because the Critical Woman reviewing the film assign more stereotypes and labels than anyone else. Turning every movie, even action-adventure leave-your-brain-at-home ones into about Issues because the lead character is not a white male. I live for the day that the Everyday Unlucky Dude is an Asiamerican guy or a native girl and some “professionally offended” twit doesn’t hark about how unrealistic it is for them to care more about saving the world, getting the girl, or running for their lives than about Important Racial/Gender Issues!
I should save Prairie Miller’s review, so that I may have a reference for a (actually fictional) pundit in my own fantasy stories, but alas, if I used her as a satirical map, I’d be accused of stereotyping liberal-minded poets with Ivory Tower degrees. “Complaining that the hero is TOO enterprising? Being offended that non-white people can misspell words? Talking about the evils of the brokerage industry in a film about a father going to extreme lengths to care for his son? No, not even the dizziest of New England twits would complain THIS much about how life can really turn out.”
Urg, and to think I once wanted to go to Barnard…
http://wbai.org/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=9437&Itemid=2
My response. lol:
I know, it's late, but I only have one thing to say:
Please take the high-minded stick out of your ass when reviewing your films. Should Chris Gardner have changed his whole life to meet your politically correct expectations?
The point of every romantic tale is that the hero is exceptional and performing outrageous tasks that the audience could only dream of, yet when the story is "Black man gets ahead by tenacity and insane goals," you tell audience, "this film is telling you your poverty is your own fault, that you are lazy." WAIT, WHAT!?
Is Batman's fight against crime saying "It's your fault that crime is rampant in your hood. What's stopping you from putting on a costume and beating up criminals?"
Every paragraph of The Pursuit of Happyness review is dripping with offended scoffing so self-righteous that the reviewer barely cares about the "based on a true story" aspect and, instead, insists that the story is racist, sexist and classist for reasons that would make sense… IF THE STORY WEREN’T TRUE!
"There are no positive female characters. Look! The wife was a shrew!” Yes, because the real Chris Gardner sold off their whole savings on a crappy product. I'd be pissed, too. Am I the only one who felt pity on her and hoped that the real woman kept in touch with her son after all this happened? Were the writers supposed to change Mr. Twissle into a woman?
"This film is manipulating you to dislike the poor because two or three people in Chris's life were not helpful to him, while the white people were. (This is all wrong. White people are always the problem.)" It’s so sad that you are willing to ignore the flaws of the stock brokers just for a chance at some high-brow cross-victimization. Those white men spent half the movie looking pass Chris, barely paying him attention, thinking about their football game, their next appointment or a damn Rubik’s cube. Stiffing him in cab fare, taking his money, pushing him to do chores… Not because he is Black, either, but because he’s an Intern and that’s his lot in life until he rises higher.
And I suppose the kindness of the Glide Memorial Baptist Church, whose Black director played himself in the movie, means nothing to you? The reviewer comments on how “not possible on this planet,” it would be for a man to go into a men’s shelter with a child, but obviously it was little exceptions like this that caused the real Chris Gardner to have the script changed to add him in. “If it weren’t for him, I wouldn’t be here. He had to be in it.”
“Then he could have added in a woman! There had to have been some woman who helped him during this time!” The story is about a man making a life for his son and the review stops to write about how women are portrayed… as if a hippy stealing some gizmo or a girlfriend at the end of her rope is meant to summarize the moral fiber of %51 of our species. (Nevermind that the movie is full of hundreds of real homeless men, ungrateful men, insensitive men, and too-busy-for-you men. HOW can we raise our sons with so many examples of flawed, normal people around them?!)
“All-white, male utopia,” Prairie Miller? Chris Gardner’s moment of Happyness at the end is realizing he can provide for his son again. He runs to the day-care and grasps the boy. But I suppose Christ would need to become Christina for the underlying theme of the story to matter, since “single dad doing whatever it takes to raise his child” isn’t as archetypical as single mothers.
Of course, if it was a story about small town girl Christina, working a no-pay internship, beating out a room of college-educated men, to work in a prestigious firm after being dumped by her boyfriend, kicked out her apartment, forced to live in a Baptist church shelter and running, running, running all over San Francisco with only her skill “with numbers and people” to help her…
But, no, let’s get back to judging Chris for not calling child services or some government agency, which would probably take his boy away, which is the very point of this movie. Chris Gardner wanted to raise his son. Forget even the Rags-to-Riches plot, which is so easy for political-minded dunderheads to fall back on. The man wanted to stay in his child’s life. He reached for anything that could help him and did many stupid, risky, dangerous, foolish things for that goal. Just like every other hero that has ever been worth telling a story about. But that’s a Bad thing in this case, because he is Black, thus his only real options are to revolt against the entirety of America because he’s poor, yet also get on welfare.
I’ve wasted an hour of my life to this letter, wasted time being offended at you for being offended at this, so now I am just sad. In 1984, a Chinese immigrant mistook Happyness for Happiness and that offends you. A black guy you don’t know wasn’t willing to give Chris Gardner $14 and for Chris to mention that in a retelling of his rise from poverty offends you. Portraying flaws in “people of color” piss you off?
Pretentious people piss me off. Being told that by a presidential candidate that “we need more aid for Blacks, Hispanics and poor whites” pisses me off, because I feel like punching the White guy that thinks that “Black and Hispanic” don’t also need adjective qualifiers like “poor”. “Feminist” commentary on “how women are portrayed” pisses me off because the Critical Woman reviewing the film assign more stereotypes and labels than anyone else. Turning every movie, even action-adventure leave-your-brain-at-home ones into about Issues because the lead character is not a white male. I live for the day that the Everyday Unlucky Dude is an Asiamerican guy or a native girl and some “professionally offended” twit doesn’t hark about how unrealistic it is for them to care more about saving the world, getting the girl, or running for their lives than about Important Racial/Gender Issues!
I should save Prairie Miller’s review, so that I may have a reference for a (actually fictional) pundit in my own fantasy stories, but alas, if I used her as a satirical map, I’d be accused of stereotyping liberal-minded poets with Ivory Tower degrees. “Complaining that the hero is TOO enterprising? Being offended that non-white people can misspell words? Talking about the evils of the brokerage industry in a film about a father going to extreme lengths to care for his son? No, not even the dizziest of New England twits would complain THIS much about how life can really turn out.”
Urg, and to think I once wanted to go to Barnard…
Sunday, October 25, 2009
Urban Wastelands
I pass by hundreds of abandoned houses and storefronts here in Cleveland. It is sickening to meditate on the conditions of Chicago, Detroit, Youngstown and other industrial cities.
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
RDMS: Preventive Care
How would preventive care become common when...?
1. Most people don’t talk to doctors that often.
a. Why? Usual reason starts with socialization (not trained to think that way), then with it costing money, not enough doctors for common rapport
b. How do you start up rapport? Supporters build rapport with lower health officials like nurses. Build the new system with anything given, hoping to upgrade later.
2. Most people don’t want to change their health habits.
a. Why? Inertia, pride, stubbornness, disagreeing with preventive care, dismotivation
b. Why do people that DO want preventive care not change their habits? The sea of detractors keeps support of change low. Change is difficult when no one else cares.
c. Why do people who don’t want preventive care keep their habits? Who cares? If they don’t want preventive care, they aren’t the ones being serviced. Why bother with persuading distracters? The focus should be on building a preventive care system that can sustain itself even with the few people who would want it. In time, by the virtue of our truth, will we become “common”. We can only build that system by ignoring distracters and focusing all attention and resources on the supporters: separating them from distracters (Black), supporting them (White), reminding them to support us (Yellow), and building a proper, legal, inclusive alternative (Red).
3. Training one general practice doctor takes 10 years and hundreds of thousands of dollars.
a. Why? System demands a pre-med degree, then medical school, then fellowship as standard. Training facilities compete to be revolutionary, costing money. Colleges are systematically expensive and rising.
b. Where is the equilibrium between time (and money) to train and the quality needed for preventive care doctors? Research needed. Look into how developing countries train doctors and other training standards, like for registered nurses, dentists and unconventional doctors.
i. How would a sub-standard doctor become credited? By truthfully stating an efficient standard for a preventive care doctor/nurse and providing results using that standard, you can build credit and respect for the standard.
4. Most American doctors are surgeons instead of general practice doctors.
a. Why? The cost on a student to become a doctor is so great they are forced to specialize to get out of debt. Laws are designed to keep up demand for surgeons. General doctors require more commitment on patient’s end, which is not in demand.
b. How many doctors would be willing to go to a new system? Probably not many, but that is only a temporary problem. Doctors training other doctors makes more doctors in the future. Look to people who are attracted to Doctors Without Borders and other humanistic ways to practice. There is no point in looking to people who want money.
c. Could we reduce their debt? In time, maybe, but the point of the process is to start with leftovers from the old system and build a new one that wouldn’t put medical students in so much debt to start with. By that logic, why waste energy transfiguring the old when we are meant to birth new?
5. The present industry controls its regulation and laws.
a. Why? Because all industries eventually insure their survival by the law.
b. What could we do about this? Request separate laws applicable to us. We will live alongside the old system.
c. How do you start a medical school? I don’t know.
d. What about insurance and liability? Insurance goes hand in hand with the medical industry, mostly because the medical industry is systematically expensive, thus requiring an auxiliary insurance industry that is systematically miserly. At the same time, the miserable treatment of patients backfires with lawsuit-happy patients. The whole mess breeds contempt and distrust between client and professional.
i. How do we protect ourselves from misery? By working under the established system to cover liability, with full intent of separating and strictly discriminating based on attitude. By working under the establishment but not for it, we observe misery in its natural habitat. We can understand it. Human nature breeds misery.
1. What is breeding these problems? Greedy people taking advantage of human nature, companies looking to profit off the sick instead of an output-based operation, the industry being systematically expensive thus making a starting point for change difficult to isolate, people speaking on the topic with intent to deceive, organizational and bureaucratic mismanagement…
a. And then? And then we separate. If a person is not willing to address these breeding pits immediately, they do not really want to separate.
ii. And insurance? The insurance market exists because healthcare is expensive. By having a “universal” pool of funds for all members, insurance is obsolete. The goal is to heal, not to pay for healing. Research the most common procedures done in medicine, how much they cost, and why they charge their fee. If 30% of members may have one blood transfusion at some time in their lives, and a blood transfusion costs $1,000, then the pool of money should balance out to having $30,000 per 100 members for blood transfusions.
1. Most people don’t talk to doctors that often.
a. Why? Usual reason starts with socialization (not trained to think that way), then with it costing money, not enough doctors for common rapport
b. How do you start up rapport? Supporters build rapport with lower health officials like nurses. Build the new system with anything given, hoping to upgrade later.
2. Most people don’t want to change their health habits.
a. Why? Inertia, pride, stubbornness, disagreeing with preventive care, dismotivation
b. Why do people that DO want preventive care not change their habits? The sea of detractors keeps support of change low. Change is difficult when no one else cares.
c. Why do people who don’t want preventive care keep their habits? Who cares? If they don’t want preventive care, they aren’t the ones being serviced. Why bother with persuading distracters? The focus should be on building a preventive care system that can sustain itself even with the few people who would want it. In time, by the virtue of our truth, will we become “common”. We can only build that system by ignoring distracters and focusing all attention and resources on the supporters: separating them from distracters (Black), supporting them (White), reminding them to support us (Yellow), and building a proper, legal, inclusive alternative (Red).
3. Training one general practice doctor takes 10 years and hundreds of thousands of dollars.
a. Why? System demands a pre-med degree, then medical school, then fellowship as standard. Training facilities compete to be revolutionary, costing money. Colleges are systematically expensive and rising.
b. Where is the equilibrium between time (and money) to train and the quality needed for preventive care doctors? Research needed. Look into how developing countries train doctors and other training standards, like for registered nurses, dentists and unconventional doctors.
i. How would a sub-standard doctor become credited? By truthfully stating an efficient standard for a preventive care doctor/nurse and providing results using that standard, you can build credit and respect for the standard.
4. Most American doctors are surgeons instead of general practice doctors.
a. Why? The cost on a student to become a doctor is so great they are forced to specialize to get out of debt. Laws are designed to keep up demand for surgeons. General doctors require more commitment on patient’s end, which is not in demand.
b. How many doctors would be willing to go to a new system? Probably not many, but that is only a temporary problem. Doctors training other doctors makes more doctors in the future. Look to people who are attracted to Doctors Without Borders and other humanistic ways to practice. There is no point in looking to people who want money.
c. Could we reduce their debt? In time, maybe, but the point of the process is to start with leftovers from the old system and build a new one that wouldn’t put medical students in so much debt to start with. By that logic, why waste energy transfiguring the old when we are meant to birth new?
5. The present industry controls its regulation and laws.
a. Why? Because all industries eventually insure their survival by the law.
b. What could we do about this? Request separate laws applicable to us. We will live alongside the old system.
c. How do you start a medical school? I don’t know.
d. What about insurance and liability? Insurance goes hand in hand with the medical industry, mostly because the medical industry is systematically expensive, thus requiring an auxiliary insurance industry that is systematically miserly. At the same time, the miserable treatment of patients backfires with lawsuit-happy patients. The whole mess breeds contempt and distrust between client and professional.
i. How do we protect ourselves from misery? By working under the established system to cover liability, with full intent of separating and strictly discriminating based on attitude. By working under the establishment but not for it, we observe misery in its natural habitat. We can understand it. Human nature breeds misery.
1. What is breeding these problems? Greedy people taking advantage of human nature, companies looking to profit off the sick instead of an output-based operation, the industry being systematically expensive thus making a starting point for change difficult to isolate, people speaking on the topic with intent to deceive, organizational and bureaucratic mismanagement…
a. And then? And then we separate. If a person is not willing to address these breeding pits immediately, they do not really want to separate.
ii. And insurance? The insurance market exists because healthcare is expensive. By having a “universal” pool of funds for all members, insurance is obsolete. The goal is to heal, not to pay for healing. Research the most common procedures done in medicine, how much they cost, and why they charge their fee. If 30% of members may have one blood transfusion at some time in their lives, and a blood transfusion costs $1,000, then the pool of money should balance out to having $30,000 per 100 members for blood transfusions.
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
Yahoo! Answers :)
Hullo, hullo.
I've been writing questions on Yahoo Answers. The result is just as I expected--So I won't go into that negativity. :P
But if any of these questions strike you, feel free to give a reply-answer.
What would you contribute...
to increase basic nutrition for underclass kids?
to build a Progressive media outlet?
to make childhood easier for the underclass?
to improve your neighborhood?
to improve the teamwork/communication of your favorite civic group?
in a village based on a common social goal?
to see "kids respect authority" in your neighborhood?
to get your city/town off coal and oil?
How can society/gov’t/the health care industry raise prevention care demand to meet supply?
(Asked the same question thrice in different areas... I'm pretty sure thats breaking policy. :S)
Would you live in a village based on a common social goal?
What enables you to actively live your cultural ideals?
What prevents you from actively living your cultural ideals?
Do communists, socialists and democratic socialists set up credit unions amongst themselves?
(I've been really interested in what fringe groups actually DO in America...)
I've been writing questions on Yahoo Answers. The result is just as I expected--So I won't go into that negativity. :P
But if any of these questions strike you, feel free to give a reply-answer.
What would you contribute...
to increase basic nutrition for underclass kids?
to build a Progressive media outlet?
to make childhood easier for the underclass?
to improve your neighborhood?
to improve the teamwork/communication of your favorite civic group?
in a village based on a common social goal?
to see "kids respect authority" in your neighborhood?
to get your city/town off coal and oil?
How can society/gov’t/the health care industry raise prevention care demand to meet supply?
(Asked the same question thrice in different areas... I'm pretty sure thats breaking policy. :S)
Would you live in a village based on a common social goal?
What enables you to actively live your cultural ideals?
What prevents you from actively living your cultural ideals?
Do communists, socialists and democratic socialists set up credit unions amongst themselves?
(I've been really interested in what fringe groups actually DO in America...)
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
Rant on Black Nation-Building
Revolutionary: What skills can you offer for nation-building in the Black community?
Flags and poetry and bold words mean nothing without that one word in your opening question:
SKILLS.
Afro-centric Black people, and every other fringe culture group in America, needs to learn that their big talk is worthless if they can't do the basics in life.
A city needs, to sustain itself, energy, transportation, trade, means of social control, food, water, waste disposal and a means for education.
That isn't sexy, sassy or dynamic. It's just public administration. And people don't want to do it because that would mean acquiring skills, using them and having few to blame but themselves if they come up short.
Every fringe group in America depends on the mainstream, no matter how different they claim to be. If you think Pan-Africanism is a worthwhile goal, then go for it. But realize that "independent business" isn't enough. They have to re-create the entire net or not both at all, because they will only be fooling themselves.
Flags and poetry and bold words mean nothing without that one word in your opening question:
SKILLS.
Afro-centric Black people, and every other fringe culture group in America, needs to learn that their big talk is worthless if they can't do the basics in life.
A city needs, to sustain itself, energy, transportation, trade, means of social control, food, water, waste disposal and a means for education.
That isn't sexy, sassy or dynamic. It's just public administration. And people don't want to do it because that would mean acquiring skills, using them and having few to blame but themselves if they come up short.
Every fringe group in America depends on the mainstream, no matter how different they claim to be. If you think Pan-Africanism is a worthwhile goal, then go for it. But realize that "independent business" isn't enough. They have to re-create the entire net or not both at all, because they will only be fooling themselves.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
