Rants, politics, opinions, other miscellaneous writings, a controversial and provocative 'questionnaire'... plus some unconventional suggestions! Hey, I may be wrong, but I do try to be interesting.

THE REAL CULTURE WAR: I posted a final essay about the recent, traumatic 2004 political season -- another layered appraisal of "The Real Culture War," showing how obsolete and irrelevant the hoary old "left-right axis" has become. What appears to be dividing America, instead, is the issue of modernity. Whether progress is either possible or desirable. "Moderates" who stand, tormented, between fanatical poles of left and right are not different because their views are more tepid. They are different because many are capable of believing in science, in human improvability, and in tomorrow. My suggestions cater to neither liberal dogmans nor conservative ideologies. They are pragmatic. They serve the Enlightenment. Comments and criticism is welcome at my blog: davidbrin.blogspot.com.

"None of the observations that I just offered can be made to fit the most pervasive, misleading and mind-numbing political metaphor of all time -- the left-right political axis.... That purported "political map" has always trivialized complex issues, masking a myriad inconsistencies, contradictions and details. It also defied decades of scientific evidence for how complex human brains, personalities and societies really are. Yet, we cling to an obsolete oversimplification that has proved effective at just one thing -- enforcing alliance between people who disagree deeply over things that really matter."

AMERICA WAS NEO-CONNED!: See a few unabashedly political essays that I posted just before the 2004 election. One of them, "War in the 21st Century," is specifically about the election and whether "Pax Americana" is a viable concept for the next few decades. (I think it is, but only if led by grownups.) The other is a more abstract dissection of a weird alliance that makes up the neoconservative movement, and how is actually works tacitly with radical Muslims and other romantic forces in "Neoconservatism, Islam & Ideology."

"I plan to show that the problem of Saddam Hussein -- which was largely created by members of this administration over the course of decades -- did indeed need to be solved. But the Administration had its own reasons for stoking "emergency" passions rather than calmly pursuing planned consensus toward elective surgery under circumstance of our convenience. They did this with lies, deliberately stoked panic, divisiveness, immaturity and utter devotion to their own benefit."

QUICK-FIX THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE: Other essays in my ongoing "2004 political season" series span a range of ideas: in the first, I proposed we reform the Electoral College without tinkering with the Constitution.

"It turns out that the Electoral College, per se, is not what distorts the system so badly. It is the winner-takes-all method of allocating each state's electors."

WHY STIPULATION WORKS: In my second essay in my ongoing "politics" series, I proposed that the candidates from both major parties should stipulate, or "agree to agree" about a set of issues.

"What's wrong with the idea of two leaders finding a patch of consensus amid a sea of discord? We cheer when this occurs among heads of state, overcoming differences between nations in order to sign a treaty that finds common ground. Then why not between candidates?"

WHY CAN'T WE TALK?: In my third essay, I proposed we acknowledge that the winning candidate of modern-day Presidential elections typically does not earn more than 50% of the vote, and should honor the losing majority by meeting with -- and listening to -- a delegation from the opposing majority.

"Such a pledge would cost a candidate and president little to make or to fulfill. There is no obligation to act on what the delegations say, only to be accessible, listening occasionally to more than one ideology. More than one brain trust of cloned advisors."

LIBERTARIANISM: A number of organizations, spanning the spectrum of interest and politics, have been interested in my specialty -- the questioning of deep-seated assumptions. (Hey, a good SF author is paid to poke at clichés!) After dozens of 'unconventional' consultations, this keynote speech, given before the Libertarian Party National Convention (7/02), was finally transcribed. Beyond specifics aimed at that group, you may find the perspectives unusual and thought provoking, whatever your specific political beliefs!

"I do not believe that any 'Golden Age" lies in our past. The story of the last six thousand years was almost unrelenting misery, bullying and woe. I wake up encouraged every day that barbarians have not burned my house and that some king has not taken my daughter. So encouraged that I have to admit that my fellow citizens simply cannot be as stupid as they look! So encouraged that I peer forward to a day when coercion has become a faint memory. To a time when all children are equipped with the skills and tools to be formidable beings, fully capable of making all decisions for themselves, aided by a mere wisp of residual government that continues to wither gradually as sovereign adults wean themselves of its services, not through rancor or ingratitude, but by the simple, revolutionary step of learning to treat each other like grownups."

HATE CRIMES: See my article titled "Names That Live In Infamy" in Salon, proposing a solution to hate crimes-- take away the motivation!

"Two millennia ago, in the Hellenistic era, a young man torched one of the seven wonders of the ancient world -- the Temple of Diana at Ephesus. When caught and asked why, he replied first with grievances against individuals and his city state, then admitted that he really wanted to make a mark, to be remembered. Since he wasn't a great warrior, or creative person, his best chance was to gain infamy by destroying something."