Pages

Friday, July 14, 2017

Punch out.

I think it's CMD-O or CMD-SHIFT-O, something like that. No? Okay, try CMD-ALT-5. Do it again. Okay, now divide 87 into 214 and multiply the dividend by the square-root of fuck-all. Jesus!

That was a bit of a tantrum, I admit it. It's just that I'm living in the wrong freaking century, that's all. I'm from that period in history when people did different things for a living and those things all looked different - the doctor had a stethoscope and a mirror on her forehead, the accountant an adding machine and a legal pad, and the musician a freaking guitar. Now everybody's sitting in front of a computer, pecking at keys randomly and hoping for some elusive result. Smarty alec kids! Get off my lawn!

Matt and I are in production on another tranche of songs, and it's taking a while because we're transitioning between recording systems. Now we're using a computer-based DAW instead of a proprietary hard disk system, and well ... I miss the simplicity of just pressing record and punching stop. Those were the days, right? (Well ... they were days.) Our autopunch back then was Marvin (my personal robot assistant) with his claw on the console and a complex series of eyebrow movements. What could possibly go wrong? (Listen to some of our albums and you'll find out.)

Uh, dude ... Thanks, but no thanks.Right now we're kind of winging it, I admit ... though that's a bit more considered a state than we're usually in during recording sessions. I boot up the new system, punch a few keys, then start playing whatever instrument is called for - piano, sousaphone, kazoo, triangle, whatever - and realize a few moments later that nothing has been captured. Rinse and repeat. I need a team of scientists! And I don't mean mad scientists - we're all set on that score. If we were to ask Mitch Macaphee, our mad science advisor, to reconfigure our studio, we would end up with something on the order of what Magic Alex threw together for the Beatles back in the Apple Records days, i.e., a decorative, non-functional studio full of flashing lights with a speaker for every track and other non sequitur features.

Well, we don't want that. (No offense, Alex, wherever you are.) So if you're looking for me, look for that guy sitting at a computer terminal.

Last battles.

I listen to a few podcasts, mostly in my car. By the time I hear them, they're usually about a week or two old - I download a raft of them and dump them on to my ancient iPod. One of the ones I listen to is Jeremy Scahill's Intercepted, and it took me this long to hear his June 7 interview with Jill Stein, former Green Party candidate for president. This was billed under the headline "The Woman Democrats Love to Hate". I have a lot of respect for Scahill, but I think this interview demonstrates another type of delusion; namely, Stein's over-inflated sense of her own importance.

I have no doubt some Democrats blame her for Clinton's loss last year, but I doubt it's all that many - most of the Hillary-bots focus on Bernie Sanders when they look left. At least I hope Democrats don't spend a lot of energy hating Stein, because she really wasn't much of a factor at all. If Hillary Clinton was depending on Stein voters to carry her over the finish line - and there's little likelihood many of them would ever have decided to support Clinton - then her margin was way, way too narrow for any Democrat to win the presidency. Most of the centrist whining I hear is about the Bernie wing of the party, that they were too critical of Clinton and didn't work hard enough for her election or just withheld their votes. Nothing much about Stein at all, though they clearly don't like her.

Really not a factor in '16. Really.I agree with Stein on a lot of issues. In fact, I think I'm well to the left of the good Doctor. But the notion that the electoral duopoly can be taken down by supporting quixotic third-party presidential candidates is ludicrous, as is the suggestion that changing the way elections work in the United States is somehow "easy", as she suggests in this interview. The Green Party is a mess; they have yet to elect a congress member, senator, governor, or even lieutenant governor as far as I can tell. If they want to start contending in national elections, they need to start filling those seats first. They also need to organize around electoral reform, support instant runoff / ranked choice voting, and related proposals. Until that happens, Green Party candidates will split the center-left vote and throw our ridiculous first-past-the-post, winner-take-all elections to the Republicans, time and time again. Those changes would be years in the making - they should have focused their energies on that for the last 20 years instead of random, pointless runs for the White House.

And Jeremy, I love you, but no, there's not constitutional provision instituting a two-party monopoly. There is, however, a constitutional electoral system that is antiquated and greatly favors the wealthy. We need to change that before any we can expect any meaningful opening for third parties.

Of course, there is a faster course to progressive change than spending decades building a new third party while simultaneously countering the tide of restrictive voting: occupy the Democratic party. Take over its local, state, and national committees. Transform it from within and push it from without through massive organizing. There's no law that says the Democratic party must remain within the grip of corporate money; we can change that dynamic much faster than we can build a new party (and a congenial political environment for the same) from the ground up. Instead of re-fighting old battles, we should do that.

luv u,

jp