Christmas Eve

This holiday, my dad and I tried to write about the commonalities among decent people. December 25 has long been the holiday to celebrate new life. Yet we also wanted to acknowledge that some bad people choose death. Prior to this year's celebration, one murderer targeted Christians specifically. We wanted to discuss the significance of this crime in light of the time when Christians and others celebrate the birth of life. Here are a couple of quotes:

Christmas Eve offers a celebration of life

... Christmas Eve is the night of anticipation. It is the night when children sleep anxiously, awaiting the wonders of the new day. It celebrates the night when Joseph sat with Mary in a dirty barn in a strange city, in anguish that this was the best he could offer his young wife as she suffered labor pains with the hopes and the worries that comfort and plague every new mother. It is the night when the wise travel from afar to worship new life, when the very skies seem to sparkle in wonderment at the first breath a baby draws into his lungs. ...

The murderer targeted Christians; he wrote that some Christians "are to blame for most of the problems in the world." This prompted one Christian to reply that "the living God and his followers offend the world, the flesh, and the devil merely by reflecting light in the darkness."

But whatever the problems of Christianity (real or imagined), whatever offense others may find in it, such things are irrelevant to the heinous crime. In a civilized world, people work out their disagreements through rational debate in the public square. In a civilized world, Christians, atheists, Muslims, and others live side by side as neighbors under a political system that protects each individual's rights. ...

Broken Trail

Over the Christmas holiday, I watched the film Broken Trail with family members. It's a two-disk, three-hour movie that was made for television. I get the idea that it was filmed mostly or entirely in Canada, and the scenery is spectacular. The movie, starring Robert Duvall and Thomas Haden Church, is surprisingly good. (I was surprised because I'd never heard of it before.)

It's a classic Western. The two cowboys -- Duvall plays the uncle of Church's character -- leverage the family ranch in order to buy a herd of horses. Their purpose is to move the herd from Oregon to Wyoming, where the horses are in demand for military use. (A major buyer works out of Wyoming.) Along the way, the cowboys must overcome obstacles natural and man-made. Early in their travels, they come across a man who is transporting five young Chinese girls, whose families sold them into slavery. They are on their way to a brothel in a mean town. Needless to say, our heroes do not get on well with the slave runner. But what are a couple of cowboys supposed to do with five girls in a vast wilderness while running horses? Unfortunately, the owner of the brothel wants the seize the girls, and she knows some unsavory characters.

Such a movie easily could have been routine. But interesting dialogue and heartfelt, edgy acting from Duvall and Church make it memorable. It is a movie of strong heroes and dastardly villains, and I like that. But the heroes, with all of their financial resources tied up in the horses, have to struggle with their fears, tempers, and difficult pasts to stick together and find the strength to be towering men. Nicely done.

The movie is available at Netflix and Amazon, I noticed. I plan to buy a copy.

Computer History Museum

Those who created the computer technology that now helps us in virtually every aspect of our lives are heroes of production. The Computer History Museum is dedicated to preserving and telling the history of that development. Thanks to a reader of GeekPress.com, I found a video that introduces the museum.

My first computer was a Commodore 128, with twice the capacity of the popular Commodore 64. The "128" refers to the 128 kilobytes of RAM packed into the then-amazing machine. The computer on which I am now typing contains two gigabytes of memory. If I'm doing the math right, that means that my current machine has around 15,000 times the memory capacity of my first machine.

My first experience with digital storage was a tape drive -- as in a regular ol' cassette tape recorder. Then we went to 5.25 inch floppies, then 3.5 inch floppies, then "zip" floppies. Now new computers don't even come with floppy drives. Some 5.25 disks held 1.2 megabytes of material. The DVD drive that I now own uses disks that hold 4.7 gigabytes of material. Again, if I'm doing the math right, the new laser disks hold about 4,000 times as much material as the old magnetic disks held.

My first experiment with computer communications involved stringing a phone line from the kitchen phone to my bedroom so that I could call a local server with my 300 baud modem. A couple of times I even called a computer in California, but that meant long-distance telephone charges. Now I'm blogging at connection speeds so fast that only video seems slow.

To the men and women who have made my life so much better by improving computer technology, I offer my thanks.

Larry Bourbonnais

We now know that the church murderer "was shot multiple times by church security officer Jeanne Assam before he fired a single, fatal round at himself, the autopsy showed."

We also know that the murderer drew inspiration from the Columbine killers: "My belief is that if I say something, it goes. I am the law. If you don't like it, you die." This is moral subjectivism taken to its most nihilistic and murderous conclusions.

We also have the comments of Larry Bourbonnais, another person who showed great courage at the scene. The words of Bourbonnais, a Vietnam veteran, are recorded by the Rocky Mountain News:

After Columbine, I promised my daughters that if I'm ever in that kind of situation, that I would do something. Instead of standing by while people are being slaughtered, people need to take action.

There were two other armed guards, but they weren't doing anything. I asked one of them to give me their gun so I could take the guy out. I thought, I've got to take this guy out. I stepped out from behind a pillar so he could see me, then I saw a female come from outside.

I was either being heroic or stupid. But I was afraid the guy would shoot me from the back. I just kept thinking I wanted to take him out.

After she shot him dead, I took a 9 millimeter gun out of his right hand. It was jammed. There was a round stuck.

He was bleeding from his back. The guy was an idiot. He was standing along a wall of plate glass. She took him out. It all happened so fast.

They made me go outside because I was a key witness. I saw a male victim. The EMT had taken his clothes off. He was cold and in a lot of pain.

Two of my daughters, Stacey and Sherry, met me at the hospital. They brought me a coat and a shirt. I told them about the promise I made to them and that I tried. They were crying.

If he had killed me, I would have gone to heaven.

I haven't read elsewhere about two other armed guards. Yet, assuming that the account is basically accurate, it demonstrates a couple of things. First, the shadow of Columbine is very long. Second, people reacted to that horror in dramatically different ways. One deranged individual committed a copy-cat crime. Others resolved to rise to heroism, should the situation call for it. The names that deserve to be remembered in this case are those of Jeanne Assam and Larry Bourbonnais.

Stranger than Fiction

Recently my wife and I put Babel in the DVD player. We were treated to a preview of another movie, I think called Perfume, in which the main character murders women and turns them into perfume. Lovely. So I was already psyched for Babel. In the early scenes of that movie, a young boy in a desolate land masturbates on a cliff, then shoots a bus with his family's new rifle. That was enough for me. We popped out the video. I had already seen the preview, so I got the idea that the next two hours of the film are devoted to the husband of the shooting victim trying to find help for his wife. No thank you, and again I thank you.

Thankfully, we had also rented Stranger than Fiction, which I thoroughly enjoyed even more than I had on a previous viewing. Will Farrell is a genius actor of physical comedy. In this film, Farrell plays an IRS agent who initially leads an entirely routine life devoid of meaningful values. Then, one day, he begins to hear a narrator describing his life. As he anxiously tries to figure out what's going on, he begins to reevaluate his life and do the meaningful things that he truly wants to do. I like the movie because it is bright and positive and caring and funny -- all of the things banned from so many other Hollywood movies these days.

We also watched an old film called Executive Suite. I forget who recommended it. It is another film we truly appreciated. Yes, it's a bit dated; all the executives are white males (and all served by female secretaries) and the title sequence is quite jarring. Yet it is spectacularly acted and well written. It's the story of the struggle to replace the head executive of a furniture company after he dies. Contrary to Oliver Stone's commentary -- and I have no idea why his commentary appears on the video, as he had nothing to do with the film -- the film is not a critique of business profits. (I listened only to a few minutes of his commentary.) Instead, the film is about producing something of quality, something you can believe in and sell with pride, and something that will serve the company's long-term success, not just its short-sighted balance sheet of the month. There are a some problems with the ideas conveyed by the writing. For example, three of the seven executives are quite horrible, which is more than any business could plausibly sustain, and the other four are overly tolerant of their behavior. Nevertheless, the climactic speech is among the most rousing and morally inspiring conclusions to any movie I've seen. Furniture boring? Not in this film.

Religious Mountain News

Diana Hsieh writes that "tithing [as] a subject of public discussion in a well-respected national newspaper still floors me." Yet at least a letter to the editor is in the editorial section. The Rocky Mountain News, whether by design or by accident, seems to be pandering to religious readers more often in news articles.

For example, I recently quoted a News article that begins, "Kristi Burton was just 13 when she asked God for guidance and got it." Whether or not the author of the article actually believes that Burton received guidance from God, the line taken at face value presumes that she did.

Here's another example:

Lotto win forestalls foreclosure
The Gazette
Originally published 12:30 a.m., November 27, 2007
Updated 11:50 a.m., November 27, 2007

As the Bible says: "Whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive."

Gloria Aguda, of Fountain, said she prayed to God for help, facing foreclosure and mounting bills. She won the jackpot in the Nov. 21 Lotto drawing, worth approximately $9 million.

The article, credited to the Gazette, appeared on the Rocky's web page (though I'm not sure whether it also appeared in print). Again, taken at face value, the opening suggests that God played some role in the jackpot (which is ridiculous even from a religious perspective).

The Rocky has also reported on various occasions that victims of various accidents and tragedies thanked God for a relatively good outcome. However, the Rocky has not once mentioned why God allowed the tragedies in the first place, nor why others who pray to God nevertheless suffer worse outcomes.

I for one read the news to learn about the news -- not to read gratuitous and frankly silly references to God.

Barbarians

Americans often take for granted the rule of law and a culture that values individual rights. Yet, for most of mankind's existence, violence and barbarism were the norm. In many parts of the world, they still are.

The New York Times reports:

86 Police Officers Hurt in Paris Riots
By Katrin Bennhold

VILLIERS-LE-BEL, France, Nov. 27 -- The number of police officers injured during clashes by French youths in a suburb north of Paris rose to 86 after a second bout of violence overnight in which 60 officers were hurt, including six who are in serious condition, police officials said.

Three more horror stories come from theocratic and totalitarian regimes.

ABC News reports:

Exclusive: Saudi Rape Victim Tells Her Story
Victim to Receive Whipping and Jail for Being in Nonrelative's Car When Attacked

By Lara Setrakian
Nov. 21, 2007

Saudi Arabia's Ministry of Justice is defending a sentence of 200 lashes for the victim of a gang rape, punished because she was in the car of a male who wasn't a relative when the two were attacked.

Fox News reports:

British Teacher Faces 40 Lashes for Naming Class Teddy Bear 'Muhammad'
Monday, November 26, 2007

A British primary school teacher arrested in Sudan faces up to 40 lashes for blasphemy after letting her class of 7-year-olds name a teddy bear Muhammad.

Gillian Gibbons, 54, from Liverpool, was arrested at at Khartoum's Unity High School yesterday, and accused of insulting the Prophet of Islam.

Her colleagues said that they feared for her safety after reports that groups of young men had gathered outside the Khartoum police station where she was taken and were shouting death threats.

Fox News also reports:

150,000 Witness North Korea Execution of Factory Boss Whose Crime Was Making International Phone Calls
Tuesday, November 27, 2007

SEOUL, South Korea -- A North Korean factory chief accused of making international phone calls was executed by a firing squad in a stadium before 150,000 spectators, a South Korean aid group reported. ...

Most North Koreans are banned from communicating with the outside world, part of the regime's authoritarian policies seeking to prevent any challenge to the iron-fisted rule of Kim Jong Il.

A culture of reason and individual rights is a gift neither of nature nor of God. It is the achievement of a society whose intellectual leaders adopt the right philosophy. The United States is a rare a precious accomplishment, made possible by the ideas of the Enlightenment and the courage of our Founding Fathers. It is possible for us to lose our liberty (to a greater degree than we have already), and, if we do not reverse trends toward welfare statism, centralized power, and faith-based politics, we will lose it, eventually.

Abortion Left and Right

Thanks to a tip from Fox News, I found an article in the UK's Daily Mail titled, "Meet the women who won't have babies -- because they're not eco friendly," written by Natasha Courtenay-Smith and Morag Turner. The article reports:

[W]hen Toni [Vernelli] terminated her pregnancy, she did so in the firm belief she was helping to save the planet. ...

At the age of 27 this young woman at the height of her reproductive years was sterilised to "protect the planet".

Incredibly, instead of mourning the loss of a family that never was, her boyfriend (now husband) presented her with a congratulations card. ...

"Having children is selfish. It's all about maintaining your genetic line at the expense of the planet," says Toni, 35.

"Every person who is born uses more food, more water, more land, more fossil fuels, more trees and produces more rubbish, more pollution, more greenhouse gases, and adds to the problem of over-population." ...

When Sarah Irving, 31, was a teenager she... she came to the extraordinary decision never to have a child.

"I realised then that a baby would pollute the planet -- and that never having a child was the most environmentally friendly thing I could do."

The Daily Mail article was published on November 21. Three days later, the Rocky Mountain News published Lisa Ryckman's article, "Prayer as teen led to campaign for unborn." Ryckman reports:

Kristi Burton was just 13 when she asked God for guidance and got it.

"I was praying, what could I do to help people?" Burton said, thinking back on that December day, sick in bed and looking through library books about community service.

"And I really think God brought that to my mind and said, 'Save these people.' "

Unborn people, she means.

Seven years later, that's what Burton hopes to do, by amending the Colorado Constitution to define a fertilized egg as a person entitled to legal protection -- a concept that has the potential to outlaw abortion.

(See also Ryckman's article about the debate over the proposal and about voter demographics.)

At first glance, the positions of Vernelli and Burton seem to be diametrically opposed.

But the similarities of the women's positions are more revealing. Neither activist holds that a woman should choose to have a baby based on what the woman deems best for her own life. Both activists believe that the choice over having a baby should be made self-sacrificially, with the sacrifice directed either to the planet or to God.

The environmentalist case against having babies rests on a view of man as a blight on the planet. The fewer the people, the better, according to this view. The religious case against having abortions rests on the belief that God infuses a fertilized egg with a soul. (Of course, many Christians also believe that the use of birth control is wrong, because it thwarts God's control over the fertilization of eggs.) Neither view holds as significant the values, choices, and interests of the potential parents.

The religious and environmental movements seem to be converging, as Diana Hsieh reviews, though of course the basic motivations differ. However, while the Daily Mail finds "nothing in Toni's safe, middle-class upbringing" to offer "any clues as to the views which would shape her adult life," the article points out that Vernelli "excelled at her Roman Catholic school." The transition is unsurprising, because environmentalism is a form of secularized religion. Nor is Baptist Pastor Mike Huckabee's environmentalism surprising, given that the self-sacrifice demanded by environmentalism is so easily sublimated to the purported will of God.

"No Clash of Interests"

In Atlas Shrugged, the government puts Hank Rearden on trial for the "crime" of selling his metal to a willing buyer. Part of the courtroom exchange sheds light on Ayn Rand's view that, in a free and virtuous society, people's interests do not clash in any fundamental way.

"Are we to understand," asked the judge, "that you hold your own interests above the interests of the public?"

"I hold that such a question can never arise except in a society of cannibals."

"What... what do you mean?"

"I hold that there is no clash of interests among men who do not demand the unearned and do not practice human sacrifices."

"Are we to understand that if the public deems it necessary to curtail your profits, you do not recognize its right to do so?"

"Why, yes, I do. The public may curtail my profits any time it wishes -- by refusing to buy my products."

This is signature Ayn Rand. And the idea conveyed in the passage is central to her philosophy. Rand holds that people normally produce the values they need to live. One person's productive achievement is not another person's loss; it is another person's potential gain. Rearden produces metal, creating wealth from the goods and labor that he purchases from others. Then he trades his metal for the goods and services produced by others so that he can live and enjoy his life. In a free society, Rearden's interests align with the interests of "the public," which is taken only to mean the counting of particular individuals. In a free exchange, both parties benefit. But if some people are able to loot others, the consequence is to reward the looters at the cost of the producers and encourage others to get in on the looting.

Brutality as Entertainment

A while back I picked up Will In the World: How Shakespeare Became Shakespeare,by Stephen Greenblatt. It is filled with vivid descriptions of the world in which the bard lived. I was particularly struck -- and horrified -- by the cruelty of his society. For example, Shakespeare was caught in the middle of the Christian strife in which Catholics tried to kill the queen and the queen had traitors executed in the most barbaric of ways.

For example, here is Greenblatt's description of the torture and execution of Thomas Cottam:

[T]he scavenger's hoop... was a hoop of iron that slowly closed around the prisoner's spine, bending it almost in two. ... On May 30, 1582, he was executed in the grisly way designed to demonstrate the full rage of the state: he was dragged on a hurdle through the muddy streets of Tyburn, past jeering crowds, and then hanged, taken down again while he was still alive, and castrated; his stomach was then split open and his intestines pulled out to be burned before his dying eyes, whereupon he was beheaded and his body cut in quarters, the pieces displayed as a warning. (page 98)

You know it's a bad day when getting your head chopped off is the good part.

Chapter 6 is titled, "Life in the Suburbs." In the sport of "baiting," a bull or bear is "penned up in a ring or chained to a stake and set upon by fierce dogs." Greenblatt writes:

In a popular variation, an ape was tied to the back of a pony, which was then attacked by the dogs: "To see the animal kicking amongst the dogs, with the screams of the ape," wrote one observer, "beholding the curs hanging from the ears and neck of the pony, is very laughable." (page 177)

Why might people find such a sickening spectacle funny? Greenblatt notes that this violence against animals mirrored the routine violence against people:

[P]arents frequently whipped children, teachers whipped students, masters whipped servants, beadles whipped whores, sheriffs whipped vagrants... Almost daily [Shakespeare] could have watched the state brand, cut, and kill those it deemed offenders. (page 178)

It was, in short, a nasty time to live.

Obviously, we moderns gasp at these "very laughable" deeds. Yet looking at the horrific violence of the past might give us pause about certain practices of the present. Here are a few examples:

* Should modern laws protect animals from abuse? If so, what is the basis of such laws, and what should be their limits?

* The Supermax prison of Colorado, recently featured on 60 Minutes, keeps inmates isolated for 23 hours per day. Does that drive people insane? Does that matter?

* We have modernized our punishments; should we also see the death penalty as outdated because of the horribleness of putting somebody to death?

* On the other hand, rape is common in American prisons. People on TV and in the movies often joke about prison rape or suggest that rape is part of the expected punishment of prison.

* Let us say that we have overwhelming evidence that a nuclear bomb is planted in a U.S. city, and we also have overwhelming evidence that the suspect in custody knows where it is. Do you consider the use of torture? But there's torture, and then there's torture. There's the "scavenger's hoop," and then there's waterboarding. Would you rather be Thomas Cottam or a prisoner in Abu Ghraib (after the fall of Saddam Hussein)? But should anyone have to contemplate either horror? At what point does interrogation become torture? Are there any circumstances in which any sort of torture is justified?

* On two occasions, I have accidentally gone to a bar during "fight night." People pay money to watch "Ultimate Fighting" on television. The idea is that two contestants are locked in a cage, where they proceed to beat each other to bloody pulps, often until one gets beaten to unconsciousness. There are various rules to protect contestants, but it's perfectly legal to pound somebody in the face with a knee, for example. Boxing seems quite civilized by comparison. Should this be legal? Assuming that it should be, should people watch it? And why do they watch it? What does that say about the state of our culture that a sport like that gains in popularity?

Notes on the Harry Potter Movies

I just watched the third Harry Potter film again. While the fifth book (The Order of the Phoenix) remains my favorite, the third movie (The Prisoner of Azkaban) is the finest of the series so far. The first two films are enjoyable companions to the books. But the third movie is a stand-alone artwork. The timing in the first two films is awkward and distracting. The third movie is impeccably timed. Moreover, the the use of lighting, camera movement, and transitions, as well as the creative visual interpretations of the book, place the third movie a step above. I was thrilled to find that the fifth movie is also quite good; it takes a close second, in my book.

I see that the sixth film is "in production." The director is David Yates, who also directed Phoenix. So that's encouraging.

I hope that the producers of the films consider splitting the seventh book -- The Deathly Hallows -- into two movies. There is simply too much material in the book to allow for a single movie of reasonable length. Besides, there's a perfect place the split the movie: Chapter 24. Specifically, page 481. I think readers of the book will understand what I mean. Ending the movie there would be a fitting tribute to the character who fills that page. Then the eighth movie could be called, Harry Potter and the Battle of Hogwarts. Obviously, they should film both movies during the same period to save costs and maintain better continuity. Splitting the final book into two movies would make the studio a lot more money as well as please fans.

"Freedom Has Failed"

This quote from Atlas Shrugged, from the villain Wesley Mouch, chilled me. The context is that Mouch and his gang have passed directive after directive, slowly strangling the economy. Mouch is considering the imposition of new, more expansive controls:

Freedom has been given a chance and has failed. Therefore, more stringent controls are necessary. Since men are unable and unwilling to solve their problems voluntarily, they must be forced to do it. (page 503, 35th Anniversary Edition)

This quote immediately made me think of the health-policy debate in Colorado. How many times have "reformers" blamed the allegedly "free market" in medicine -- for the problems caused by decades of federal and state political controls? Since men are unable and unwilling to purchase "comprehensive" health insurance "voluntarily," they must be forced to do it.

Stand Up Economist

Yes! Finally a comedian for the rest of us. This guy -- Yarom Bauman, Ph.D. -- tells jokes about marginal choices and libertarians. His web page, StandUpEconomist.com, links to various video clips in exchange for your e-mail. But here are a couple of direct links:

Principles of economics, translated

Stand-up economist at Caroline's

The World Series and Scalpers

A few days ago I discussed ticket scalping. Today Grand Junction Free Press published an article by my dad and me that looks at the economics of scalping: "World Series ticket meltdown a boon for scalpers."

"... What would happen if, absent any other change, every grocer suddenly cut the price of oranges in half? Or what if everybody suddenly fell in love with oranges, but grocers barely raised prices? More people would buy oranges, until the oranges ran out. Maybe some of those lucky enough to buy oranges early in the day would 'scalp' their oranges for more than 'face value.' Or maybe grocers would institute a lottery system, so that shoppers could have a fair shot at buying cheap oranges.

"But why don't the grocers simply raise the price of oranges until shoppers choose to limit their purchases to existing supplies? ..."

Happy Halloween!

How dare people throw parties and enjoy themselves on Halloween? The Denver Post, whose editorials could use a good wake-up scare, is upset that people are spending a few dollars to celebrate the holiday. The sub-head of an October 26 editorial complains that, while Halloween "used to be a simple, fun holiday," now people spend (gasp!) $5 billion to celebrate. "That's right, 5 billion," the editorial repeats. The Post laments:

These days, you're likely to see yards turned into horror movie sets, with orange lights, talking skeletons and smoke machines. The parties start days before the holiday and frequently involve printed invitations and catered food.

Stop the madness! ...

It would be a shame to see this once-simple holiday turn into yet another commercial extravaganza with the potential to linger on your credit card bill for months.

Just imagine how Labor Day through New Year's could turn into one blurry buy-fest, filled with obligatory parties and gifts purchased out of desperation.

The Denver Post should take a chill potion.

If the editorial writers at the Post can't enjoy themselves without going into debt, and if they can't attend parties and buy gifts for some reason other than a sense of duty, that's their problem. They should stop projecting their pathologies onto the rest of us.

Let's see. The population of the United States is about 300 million. So Halloween costs about $17 per person. That's a pretty good deal, considering how much fun most of us have.

In our family, Halloween is a pretty big deal. Partly that's because, with so large a family spread out over so large a distance, it's impossible to see everybody on every holiday. My wife's parents have claimed Halloween as their own. The holiday fits with my (step) father-in-law's interests: he's a huge sci-fi and horror buff. So my parents-in-law throw a huge party every year, complete with food, costumes, elaborate and mostly hand-made props, and, yes, a talking skeleton (at least in previous years) that tells ghost stories. They even send out "printed invitations," which my wife designs and prints on our trusty HP ink jet.

This year, the party features a magic show. My father-in-law hand-built a stage prop so that his friend and my sister-in-law could re-create one of Houdini's tricks. I heard children literally scream with delight during the show. If the sticks in the mud at the Post can't manage to similarly enjoy themselves on the holiday, fine, but leave the rest of us alone.

My wife and I spent about $65 on Halloween costumes (that we can use again in future years), plus some extra money for clothes that can also be worn in regular wear. We spent $48 on DeVotchKa tickets, which allowed us to enjoyed Colorado's best band and the many spectacular costumes among the crowd. We spent additional money for food and drinks, including pie pumpkins and Jello shooters in Halloween molds. Oh, and we spent $14 to see The Nightmare Before Christmas, 3D. We've thoroughly enjoyed every penny.

Yes, people often celebrate Halloween on the Saturday before. So what? We enjoyed the events on Saturday, and we look forward to the events on Wednesday. The writers for the Post are more than welcome to stay home and watch television or clip their toenails on both nights.

The Post got the $5 billion figure -- that's right, $5 billion -- from the National Retail Federation. Here's what the release says:

With the year's spookiest holiday approaching, consumers are looking to celebrate. According to the National Retail Federation's Halloween Consumer Intentions and Actions Survey, conducted by BIGresearch, consumers are expected to spend more on Halloween this year than last year, with the average person planning to spend $64.82 on the holiday compared to $59.06 one year ago. Total Halloween spending for 2007 is estimated to reach $5.07 billion. ...

Halloween party-goers are bobbing for more than just apples. They'll also be on the lookout for candy, costumes and decorations. The average person will spend $23.33 on Halloween costumes (including children's and pet's costumes), though young adults will spend far more. In fact, according to the survey, 18-24 year-olds plan to be the most festive, spending $34.06 on costumes, nearly twice as much as they plan to spend on candy ($19.65). According to the survey, average spending will rise in all categories, including candy ($19.84, decorations ($17.73) and greeting cards ($3.92). ...

The most popular activity on Halloween this year will be handing out candy, with nearly three-fourths (72.9%) of consumers planning to stay home to hand out treats. Other popular activities will include pumpkin carving (43.3%), decorating a home and/or yard (47.8%), and throwing or attending a Halloween party (28.3%).

This is just way too much fun for The Denver Post. What are people thinking, dressing up, putting up decorations, and enjoying time with friends?

I must have missed the Post's editorial complaining about how much money people spend on baseball, which mostly comes down to hitting a ball with a stick. And is the Post next going to come out against parties in general? After all, they also often involve special dress, decorations, and food. And Christmas trees! I bet all kinds of people will buy trees and decorations later this year. Christmas sweaters, candies, cakes... too much fun! Just stop it, already!

Or could it be that people get more value for their Halloween dollars than The Denver Post gets for its incessantly whining editorials? Be sure to put the paper's editorials to their best use: spread them out on the counter or the floor to capture your pumpkin guts.

Happy Halloween!

Thanks, Rockies!

The bad news is that the Colorado Rockies got swept in the World Series. The good news is that they made it to the World Series! Who'd have predicted that during the regular season? Moreover, two of the games were very competitive, with the Red Sox beating the Rockies by a single run. Indeed, tonight in game four in the final inning, I thought the tying ball was on its way over the fence, at least for a couple happy seconds. But, for the first time, I got to watch a World Series to root for the home team. Thanks, guys.

DeVotchKa!

On Saturday night, my wife and I went with some friends to DeVotchka's Halloween concert in Denver. Amazing. The show opened with a Day of the Dead procession. After some opening music, giant ribbons descended from the ceiling, and three women climbed them to perform acrobatic dance routines. Most people were dressed in stylish costumes. And the music was up to DeVotchKa's usual standards. The band, filled out by three extra strings and another trumpet player, in addition to the four core members, alternated between the group's sorrowful tunes and heavier beats. They started playing around 10:00 p.m., and the next thing I knew it was after midnight.

We became fans with the album SuperMelodrama, though I like the next albums, Una Volta and How it Ends, even more. You can sample the band's music at its web page or through iTunes. One of my personal favorites is "The enemy guns" from How it Ends.

Ayn Rand Lexicon Online

This is spectacular! The Ayn Rand Institute just announced that the Ayn Rand Lexicon is now available online, appropriately enough at AynRandLexicon.com. You can search by key words or explore the alphabetical listing. So, if you ever wanted to know what Rand thought about something, this may well give you the answer.

Just for fun, I clicked on a topic at random. I came up with "Isolationism." Rand describes one "view of foreign policy which is wrecking the United States to this day: the suicidal view that our foreign policy must be guided, not by considerations of national self-interest, but by concern for the interests and welfare of the world, that is, of all countries except our own." Her description continues to hold for the foreign policy of the United States.

D'Anconia Warns Against Repression

Recently I read Francisco d'Anconia's monumental speech about the virtue of money in Atlas Shrugged (pages 387-391 in my Signet 35th Anniversary Edition). In answer to someone who quips that "money is the root of all evil," d'Anconia argues that the root of money is production, and the root of production is the reasoning mind. It is a speech well worth perusing, and it is often discussed.

On this reading, I was equally struck by the discussion that d'Anconia holds with Hank Rearden immediately after the speech. I have heard the claim that Atlas Shrugged encourages emotional repression. However, Ayn Rand presents some of her heros as emotionally repressed precisely to point out why that's a problem. Rearden mentions some "fool woman." D'Anconia replies:

That woman and all those like her keep evading the thoughts which they know to be good. You keep pushing out of your mind the thoughts which you believe to be evil. They do it, because they want to avoid effort. You do it, because you won't permit yourself to consider anything that would spare you. They indulge their emotions at any cost. You sacrifice your emotions as the first cost of any problem. They are willing to bear nothing. You are willing to bear anything. They keep evading responsibility. You keep assuming it. But don't you see that the essential error is the same? Any refusal to recognize reality, for any reason whatever, has disastrous consequences. There are no evil thoughts except one: the refusal to think. Don't ignore your own desires, Mr. Rearden. Don't sacrifice them. Examine their cause. There is a limit to how much you should have to bear. (page 394)

So, Rand points out, emotionalism, letting one's emotions guide one's life without rational oversight, stems from essentially the same error as emotional repression. That error is evasion, the pushing out of one's mind relevant knowledge or questions. Because Rearden tends to evade certain types of facts, he becomes emotionally repressed. This leads him to actively help those who are trying to tear him down and to damn his own desire for romantic sex. In presenting emotional repression in certain characters, Rand is exploring the roots of such repression so that it can be overcome.

Baseball Brings "External Malicious Attack" and Scalping

Never mind the fact that "all of California is burning." We have real problems in Colorado: we can't buy World Series tickets!

(Seriously, I offer my deepest sympathies to Californians who have lost property in the fires.)

Here's the extraordinary story, as told by 9News:

The Colorado Rockies say tickets for the World Series will again be sold online starting Tuesday at noon after an attack brought down the Web site on Monday.

Rockies Spokesperson Jay Alves said on Monday night that ColoradoRockies.com was the victim of an "external malicious attack" that caused a system-wide outage with Paciolan.

Paciolan is Major League Baseball's ticket vendor. The outage impacted all of its North American customers.

The Rockies suspended the sale of tickets on Monday after noon because of the system outage. ...

The Rockies initially said the system went down because of the heavy traffic to the Web site. They said there were 8.5 million hits on the Rockies Web site after the tickets went on sale.

I was one of the people unable to purchase tickets at 10:00 a.m. on Monday.

But talk about some bitter fans! Sheesh! I read some of the stories in the papers and listened to some of the comments on the radio. More than a few people were outraged.

We might draw a couple lessons from this incident.

First, look at the context. The Colorado Rockies -- whom a roommate of mine once mocked as the "Rookies" -- are in the World Series! Even if you are forced to watch it on a big-screen TV with surround sound while sitting on a couch drinking beer and eating pizza, which, admittedly, is a sorrowful existence, it's still pretty darn cool.

Second, be a little slower to cast blame. I assume the Rockies have good evidence about an "external malicious attack," given that they've announced it to the media. So it turns out not to be the fault of the Rockies or of Paciolan. Indeed, the story could get even more interesting if legal action is pursued against the attacker.

That said, I do like the idea of an on-line lottery. The problem with physical lines is that they waste time. A lottery would be easy to enter and easy to decide, and it would give everybody a fair shake. Next time the Rockies get to the World Series, I'm sure the organization will consider such alternatives.

But isn't it strange that a large percentage of the final ticket sales will go to scalpers? The baseball teams have created this value, yet millions of dollars will go into the pockets of ticket redistributers. Moreover, the process of redistributing tickets costs additional time, which could otherwise be spent in other work. Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against scalpers, given the current system of ticketing. But why is that system set up to benefit scalpers?

If the Rockies sold tickets for what scalpers will eventually get for many of them, the Rockies would be accused of greed. So, apparently, it's less greedy to knowingly redistribute millions of dollars to scalpers. (I assume that ticket prices are in some way regulated by Major League Baseball.) But, if the Rockies wanted to price out scalpers without seeming "greedy," there's another solution: they could sell tickets at market value and donate the "excess" proceeds to charity.

What about the fans who "deserve" to buy cheap tickets? The Rockies have already made tickets available to season ticket holders, so those fans are taken care of. But the Rockies could also, for example, hold a "spirit contest" to make true fans show their dedication before they're allowed to buy less-expensive tickets. Or they could donate tickets to hard cases.

Offhand, though, I can think of no reason why baseball clubs should not simply sell tickets at their market value, and keep the proceeds. If they wanted, clubs could literally auction every single ticket, sort of like ebay (with unsold tickets available at gametime for the minimum price). But baseball involves many complex relationships between clubs, players, and fans that I do not pretend to understand.

Return to Civility

I have no problem with knock-down, drag-out debate. But the key word is debate, which implies arguments invoking reason and evidence. For example, I let Bob Beauprez have it over his endorsement of health-insurance mandates. And I make a strong case against mandates. I don't even mind some good, old fashioned name-calling, so long as the name has some plausible justification given the evidence presented. For instance, I suggested that some of the arguments of animal rights groups are dishonest, but only after I subjected those arguments to a lengthy critique that demonstrates my conclusion.

But too many people, especially in comments on blogs, are just nasty, without any justification. (That's why I allow only moderated comments on my web pages.)

Consider the following e-mail that I received on October 21. It's not worth quoting, except to offer an example of the sort of comments not worth quoting. Crandallsaz**ATSIGN**msn**DOT**com writes regarding a 7News piece featuring my wife and me:

I am so sick of people going on t.v. and saying, "It's not enough, we cant live off food stamps".

It was NEVER intended to be the full budget for any family. Food Stamps is intended to HELP pay for groceries, not pay for ALL groceries. It is a subsidy.

On the other hand, I just saw the piece on 7 News, and I don't believe for a second that those two lived on their claimed budget. We don't get food stamps, and follow the ads & coupons carefully, never even considering buying higher end things like steak, etc. and there is no way in hell a couple could live off of less than $200 per month. I consider that claim a bold-faced lie. And one more thing, what an IDIOTIC statement that was, to eliminate food stamps all together and rely on hand outs. That moronic idiot needs to spend 12 months working at Social Services to get a grip of reality. That little man is FAR out of touch with reality. Like a spoiled child.

Brian in Evans.

I replied:

You are quite mistaken, and your rudeness is uncalled for.

You can see every single food receipt, and an itemized list of all food items purchased, for the month of August, at the following web page.
http://www.freecolorado.com/2007/08/challenge.html

Please do not write to me again unless you can communicate civilly.

Thank you,
Ari Armstrong

Brian in Evans replied, "You are an ARROGANT IDIOT. You're Arrogance is sickening."

So, after calling me a liar without a shred of evidence, and after receiving from me overwhelming proof of the veracity of my claims, Brian accuses me of sickening arrogance. I mean, come on.

Unfortunately, gratuitous rudeness is not restricted to e-mails and blog commentary. Here are some choice quotes from Doug Giles from his recent column at Townhall.com:

How to Shut Up an Atheist if You Must
By Doug Giles
Saturday, October 20, 2007

... Suck, for you thick atheists, is a slang word which means to make or to be really, really crappy (kind of like how our culture becomes anytime you guys mess with it). ...

...prissy anti-Christs... pissy God haters... no-God numb nuts... comfortable and cocky atheist...

[E]verywhere I go and speak -- be it in conferences, on the radio, on television or in print -- I'm going to encourage the tens of thousands of Christians I address that every time and everywhere they get crapped on by an atheist with unfounded arguments to open their mouths and slam dance them with facts found in these two new brilliant books from Regnery [by Dinesh D'Souza and Robert Hutchinson].

Yes, I can feel the love of Christ descend upon me through the words of Doug Giles.

At least Giles does offer some arguments presented by others. (They aren't very good arguments, but that's a subject of another post.) For Giles, though, these arguments become weapons of propaganda, intended not to win an honest and spirited debate, but to "shut up" the other side.

Harry Potter's Success

The Harry Potter books have been phenomenally successful. CNN reports, "The last installment of the Harry Potter series sold a record-breaking 11.5 million copies in the U.S. in the first 10 days on sale... To date, more than 350 million copies of the seven books in the Harry Potter series have been sold worldwide."

And Potter is very much an international phenomenon. The Guardian reports:

Publisher Bloomsbury [of Britain] revealed [on September 18, 2007] that its English-language version of the boy wizard's final tale has sold as many copies overseas as in the UK. In Germany alone [one million] copies were sold in the last month. Pre-orders in China were more than 200% higher than those of the previous book.... [T]he untranslated Harry Potters have seen huge demand from impatient fans who want the books as soon as they come out.

The books have sold so well in part because they are very well written fantasy stories with richly drawn characters. Even though Harry and his friends can do amazing things, it's easy to imagine living in their world while reading the books. But part of the reason the books have sold so well is that Rowling presents a strong moral message of courage and strong character that children are obviously hungry for.

Rowling's sales figures are indeed impressive. By way of comparison, Ayn Rand wrote some of the most influential novels of the 20th Century. Yet, according to a biography from 1995, "Every book by Ayn Rand published in her lifetime is still in print, and hundreds of thousands of copies are sold each year, so far totalling more than twenty million." Even assuming robust sales since then, Rand's books have sold less than ten percent the numbers of Rowling's books. (No doubt sales of Atlas Shrugged will get a boost when and if the movie ever reaches the screen.)

But numbers don't mean that much. What will be the lasting cultural influence of, for example, The Da Vinci Code? The reason that Rand's books have had such influence is that they present in dramatic form philosophic ideas of profound personal importance to the reader. The Harry Potter books present some important ideas, but they are not as profound, as original, or as integrated into the story.

The main reason that Rowling has had and will continue to have such profound cultural influence is that she is reaching millions of children when they are first exploring ideas and first thinking about moral choices. Harry and his best friends belong to the school house of Gryffindor, the house of the brave, and Rowling presents an inspiring image of moral courage. (I'll have more to say about Rowling's themes at a later time.)

But perhaps the best thing about Rowling's books is that they have encouraged children to grapple with a complex story and difficult themes. The children who have graduated from those books will be prepared to read -- and eager to find -- other great and inspiring works of literature, such as Rand's novels.

Dr. Pritchett on Freedom

Inspired by the 50th anniversary of Atlas Shrugged, I decided to read the great novel again. I'm nearly a third of the way through. The novel is a magnificent accomplishment -- and it's as though I'm reading it for the first time. The first third focusses on the characters of Dagny Taggart, the great railroad executive; Hank Rearden, the steel producer; and Francisco d'Anconia, the copper owner who has apparently fallen to depravity. The dramatic tension, as when Dagny and Hank meet at a party or celebrate an accomplishment, is gripping.

I thought that I would include a few quotes on this web page. They're not necessarily the most central quotes; they're just what happen to grab me. Here's what Dr. Pritchett has to say about the Equalization of Opportunity Bill, which forces business owners to sell off all but one enterprise:

But I believe I made it clear that I am in favor of it, because I am in favor of a free economy. A free economy cannot exist without competition. Therefore, men must be forced to compete. Therefore, we must control men in order to force them to be free. (page 129)

Ridiculous? Nobody would ever actually say that? But my previous entry quotes just such a statement.

Claire Danes Shines

At first I resisted seeing the film Stardust because it looked like a fantasy movie geared to kids. Well, it is a fantasy movie, and it is the most delightful film I've seen this year. I'm grateful for my friends' recommendation. I notice that it's still playing on a few movie screens. I expect to see it a third time before it disappears, then wait expectantly for the DVD.

A young man, trying to win the heart of the local beauty, sees a falling star and pledges to fetch it in exchange for the girl's hand. But to retrieve the star, our hero must cross the wall that separates England from the magical world beyond. In that world, a fallen star is not a hunk of metal and ash -- it is a lovely young lady, in this case portrayed by Claire Danes. Our hero must learn to become a man, save the star, and figure out whom he loves.

The entire cast of the film is spectacular, but the real, er, star of the film is Danes. Hers is a joyous performance.

By the way, my wife and I also saw Danes in Evening. I do not love the story, and Danes's character is not consistently drawn (perhaps because a screenwriter worked over the original novel). But the film has its rewarding moments, usually when Danes is on screen.

Atlas Shrugged -- The Game

Often I come across tidbits in the popular media and think, "Wow, that could have come straight out of Atlas Shrugged." Indeed, Ayn Rand's ability to read and predict cultural trends can seem uncanny. So, as a fun way to celebrate the 50th Anniversary of the publication of the novel, I'm suggesting Atlas Shrugged -- The Game.

It's simple to play. Just blog the best example you can find from (let's say) the past eight weeks of commentary that sounds like it could have been lifted straight from the pages of Atlas Shrugged. I imagine that nearly all examples will sound like the voice of a villain, unfortunately. Edit out specifics and leave only the general points. Let's give it, say, till the end of October. Here's my entry for the sort of mealy-mouthed gibberish common among Atlas's political "reformers:"

It's heating up. The debate... is picking up speed... Unfortunately, this naturally leads to polarization of opposing views regarding a critically important issue for all of us. And this cheapens and oversimplifies the discussion.

Our [industry] can't be corrected with one liners and political scoring points.

We need cooperation. We need compromise. We don't need political hoopla.

Thankfully, the continued work of the... Commission is a good example of how a group of people with differing views can work together on a critical issue. It would be premature to grade their efforts. However, they are making progress and we all should support their endeavor.

Source: Dr. Michael J. Pramenko, "Time to find people 'medical homes'," Grand Junction Free Press, September 28, 2007.

Celebrating Atlas Shrugged

From the Colorado Freedom Report:

"Today marks the 50th anniversary of the publication of Atlas Shrugged, Ayn Rand's seminal novel about producers who go on strike to oppose their treatment at the hands of political plunderers. The novel celebrates the greatness possible to the freed human mind in pursuit of life-enhancing values. The work unabashedly endorses the moral doctrine of rational self-interest. ...

"Atlas Shrugged lays out the vision of heroic people who refuse to compromise their principles -- and thereby refuse to compromise their happiness. Such people realize the full value of life on earth, and they therefore apply their reason and efforts to the goal of living. They hold productiveness as a moral virtue, and they seek to protect the political liberty that allows individuals to act, create, and trade according to their own judgment."

Shift Happens

Thanks to an article from the Rocky Mountain News, I found a short video created by Karl Fisch of Arapahoe High School in Centennial.

Fisch's first video was so popular that he created a second version. Both videos summarize various trends in education and the advance of technology. These videos brought tears to my eyes. Human achievements in the computer age are astounding.

I have two minor criticisms. First, the videos do not distinguish between "new information" and universal truths. It remains the job of philosophy to teach us how to organize information conceptually and hierarchically. Second, the videos make it seem as though the advance of technology is inevitable. It is not. Human productivity is inextricably linked to political freedom. Technology can be smashed much more easily than it can be created. A socialized economy will grind to a halt and then deteriorate. A virulent theocracy will systematically destroy the freedom of the mind and the technology that flows from it.

What Fisch's videos demonstrate is how much we humans have achieved -- and how much there is worth fighting for.

More Serenity 2 Schemes

Late last night (actually early this morning), I posted an entry about the possibility of a sequel to Joss Whedon's magnificent film Serenity. I offered a few ideas for promoting the sequel.

Today I received the following comment:

Anonymous Universal Executive said...
Duly noted. Thanks for the tips.

October 5, 2007 8:42 AM

Now, I don't know if the author is actually a "Universal Executive" -- hopefully so -- but at least somebody managed to find the blog entry. And the comment renewed my excitement. If a sequel is a dream, at least it is a pleasant one. And it has to be a dream before it can become a movie.

I'd like to lay down a possible line of attack for getting the fan base more involved in marketing the second movie. Let us assume that Universal has approved back-to-back filming of Serenity parts two and three. Let us further assume that Universal has selected cool titles, hired outstanding print-ad designers, and planned the promotion of a slick preview. I think the way to go is to release the original movie to television a couple weeks or so before the second movie pops.

So here's where the fans come in. Universal should schedule major-city screenings of the original film (or maybe even the new film) about two months before the release of the second film. Send out the stars again, just like before. To the extent practical, hand out free tickets to known supporters of Serenity, and sell the rest of the tickets. But here's the big difference: print out something like a million slick, full-color postcards that feature the new film and its release date. Hand these cards out in stacks and encourage fans to mail or give them away to friends. Heck, I'd gladly spend $50 on stamps to mail out the postcard to my friends. It would be a good way to touch base with people as well as to promote the film. Also have available for sale T-shirts that feature the film and its release date. And make it easy for fans to buy (or download) these items.

So, Universal, as good as you've been about Serenity, "I'm asking more of you than I have before."

Serenity 2?

Paul Hsieh of Geek Press e-mailed me a story from Cinema Blend that discusses the possibility of a Serenity sequel.

For those of you who have never heard of Serenity, it's the spectacular sci-fi film by Joss Whedon (now on video) that follows the television show Firefly.

Unfortunately, even though the critics and the fans loved the movie, it performed poorly at the box office (despite my early predictions that it would do well).

Cinema Blend reports, "Serenity was a massive flop in theaters, but could big DVD sales for the box office bombed film be enough to resurrect the franchise? Alan Tudyk thinks so and he's excited about it, even if his character is dead. ... With the film's box office numbers as bad as they were, it might make sense for the studio to push a sequel out the door as a direct-to-DVD sequel."

I think the studio should consider the possibility that a sequel could do far better at the box office. The sequel will build on the success of the first movie. More people will have heard about it. And, if the studio is smart, it will market the sequel far better than it marketed the first movie. (I discussed some of the marketing problems previously.) Here are my recommendations for the studio:

1. Take advantage of the enthusiastic fan base! Sell Serenity shirts, hats, etc. at or near cost so that fans will advertise the movie's release for you. I never was able to find a licensed shirt to purchase. I loved the pre-screenings. But there have got to be more ways to make it easy for fans to advertise for you.

2. Run competent newspaper ads this time. The print ads for the first movie failed to take advantage of the critical success and other selling points of the movie.

3. Pick a more exciting title. When you go to see, say, Star Wars, you pretty much know what you're in for. I think the title Serenity, as cool as it was for existing fans, turned off others because it sounds like a movie in which a bunch of old people take a boat out on the lake.

4. Bring back Wash, because we love him, and because, as the article points out, Tudyk is an increasingly successful actor. I know, Wash is dead. But how about a video that Wash left for Zoe? (Now if I can just figure something out for Ron Glass...)

5. Joss planned a trilogy. So film both sequels back-to-back. The up-front cost will be higher, but the cost per movie will be lower, meaning more yummy profits in the end.

6. Re-release the original a week or two before the sequel? Or on TV?

(And now I I see the problem with blogs; it's 3:00 a.m. But Serenity is worth it!)