Author: John P. Dougherty, a.k.a. "jd"

Computer Science Professor, Rotarian, Musician to some degree, Advocate and Dad -- all concurrently.

The argument for a free society …

There are many people on the planet trying hard to improve things; the question is often, for whom?

Recently, a very wealthy, and thus, very loud voice arose “to fight to restore a free society.”  I really worked hard to relax, open my mind and read through the prose.  I was actually impressed at the writing; concise, pointed, very motivating.  In a nutshell, my takeaway was that “the fundamental concepts of dignity, respect, equality before the law and personal freedom” — the principles of a free society — enable people to succeed, to improve their lot in life.  The author cites well respected people (e.g., Thomas Jefferson), and that his company provides employment for so many Americans (directly and indirectly).  As far as I can tell, this is all true.

Well, taken on its own, and IMHO, this is well-intentioned argument for more laissez-faire approaches, minimizing government intervention (interruption?) to encourage people to make their own lives as good as they can be.  But I went to college and studied such things as the Tragedy of the Commons to see that there is a need for some centralized/common authority to maintain shared resources (think an operating system in a computer, managing resources shared among programs and users).  And yes, laissez-faire implies some property protection, but I suspect this would still be too much.

Furthermore, we often do not see the impacts of our good intentions.  The author’s company involves energy, and very important and very profitable industry.  However, there are consequences to the environment that are often minimized, even in the face of overwhelming information.  Sure, the author cites the many awards that his company has earned, and I do sincerely hope these awards continue and that his company improves.  But not all companies do, and many ignore or actively argue against the existing science of climate change at the peril of the entire population.  I do not have the time or resources to find all the evidence, perhaps the author can take some of the money used for lobbying and political action for appropriate due diligence.

So, I also hope for all people to succeed, and get a fair chance.  I am just not persuaded by this particular argument that government is always the cause, and free enterprise is the answer (e.g., don’t get me started on the big bailouts!).  Actually, I just saw an interesting piece about a minimum income supported by both left and right — go figure!

Getting the news …

I find that I spend my time overwhelmed with information, and have been looking to filter signal from noise — you?

The high road includes things like PBS NewsHour, NPR, BBC World, Al Jazerra America, NYTimes, Washington Post, LA Times (I’ll miss a few I’m sure), and  avoiding/minimizing CNN, MSNBC, Fox, broadcast news, even local news (OK, I admit I watch Fox sometimes just to get the jokes on the Colbert Report).  I try to stay on the high road as much as I can, since it appears from one study at Fairleigh Dickinson University that the source matters to some degree.

For more in depth, I like Frontline, and more recently Vice.  I was suspect of the latter, expecting sensationalized stories of the obscure given it is on HBO, but the first two episodes from this year had surprisingly good coverage of important stories that are off the radar.

However, I think we really need some place for prioritizing, what’s the most important thing to watch — yes, yes, I realize this is relative to who, where and when, but perhaps we can include some type of guidance.  And, yes, this is often implied in the source of the news, or the comments, but I know I would appreciate (and support) honest assessment from the source itself.  Problem is, where’s the revenue?

Also, in the short term I admit I use TDS, Colbert and even Real Time to help with analysis and prioritizing — sad but true.

And so it goes …

I’ve been meaning to start some sort of “permanent record” of my ideas, thoughts, take on things if only to document to future generations (esp. my own kids, descendants …) that I had ideas beyond computing and teaching, and often in contrast to the current political and cultural thinking.  In other words, I do not want to be painted with the same brush as my generation on many things.

Think The Daily Show with not as many laughs, but hopefully some.  The post title is from a Billy Joel song (not the upcoming movie), one of my favorites as it ends as much of life seems to end … incomplete, fuzzy, with emotion but not necessarily closure.

I guess I am learning to live with that, and I will adjust (another song, John Gorka’s “I’m from New Jersey“).  Here goes somethin’.