CHOKE (U.S.A.) Choke 1997
6 minutes ago
Saturday, 6 November 2010
Gram Parsons interviewed by Michael Bates (Audio 1973)
Gram Parsons on Cosmic American Music, Keef, The Byrds, The Burritos and how Waylon Jennings had to walk around the block to smoke a joint when being produced by Chet Atkins amongst many other things...
Ethical Reporters Against Faux News
HERE
(Thanx Bodhi!)
Friday, 5 November 2010
'Big society' must be rooted in altruism
There could be no better example of the coalition government's contradictory ambitions than news that councils, desperate to deliver David Cameron's "big society", are planning to offer supermarket-style reward points to goad people into being good citizens. But, why is that so bad?
Behaviour expressive of certain values tends to form a self-reinforcing loop. Hence, appealing to self-seeking, materialistic gain, makes people less likely to be communally and altruistically motivated. Conversely, being involved in a collective enterprise tends to make us less self-absorbed and more likely to be positively inclined to take part in a "big society". For example, it was the experience of "national unity" during war time, writes the historian Paul Addison, that laid the cultural and political foundations to build a more caring society fit for returning heroes after 1945.
In short, appeal to self-interested individualism and you will get self-interested individuals. Emphasise the intrinsic and mutual benefits of common endeavour and you will begin to grow a nation where people are more inclined to look out for each other.
Effectively paying people to be good citizens can also directly backfire. A classic study looked at the results of different approaches to blood donation in the UK, where people volunteer and in the United States where they got paid. In the US, research by the rightwing Institute of Economic Affairs theorised that paying donors was the way to increase supply. Subsequent analysis by Richard Titmuss found the opposite. Not only did more people give blood when it was unpaid, but that voluntarily donated blood was of a higher quality.
The financial incentive increased dishonesty among donors who lied more often about their health conditions. Titmuss concluded: "Commercialisation of blood and donor relationships represses the expression of altruism." It was a classic and common error. Think of how you feel when good friend invites you to dinner. Now imagine how you would feel if the same friend offered to pay you to go to dinner with them? Relationships nurtured by open gift giving and reciprocity differ from commercial ones. It's the difference between a loving relationship and prostitution.
Economics, too, often boils human relationships down to a caricature of self-interest and competition. In justification, it invokes misappropriated Darwinian notions of "survival of the fittest". But, this misses the equally successful evolutionary strategies of collaboration, symbiosis and co-evolution. Co-operative companies, tellingly, weathered the recession better than others.
The proposed hook-up with commercial, supermarket-based reward cards also appears self-defeating. The point of a big society is an active, engaged citizenry. But research on the impact of big stores on communities shows that their dominant presence can reduce voter turnout. They do so by unweaving the tighter social fabric that grows in more diverse economies. As more of every pound spent by shoppers stays locally if the shops are locally owned and operated, encouraging the opposite will drain not invigorate a big society. It gets more personal, too. Because of their socially alienating store formats, large chain stores even reduce the number of conversations people have while shopping, further dissolving the social glue.
Yet, a further worry might be the disturbing potential for data convergence that would occur once the enormous power of commercial store cards are combined with the personal and other information that government authorities hold on people.
I think it is far more likely that people don't vote with their feet to build the big society due to a lack of time, rather than financial or material incentive.
Recession and chronic public spending cuts are set to hugely stress social cohesion. And, there will be large numbers of people in structural unemployment (probably blamed for their fate) and many, many others working ever longer to stay afloat.
The big society needs more time banks where people swap time and skills, and a shorter working week, underpinned by sufficient safety nets, to create the conditions for a big society. Engaging vastly more people in helping communities to function will not only radically reduce costs (although that is not the reason to do it), it will enormously improve the quality of neighbourhood life, raising individual and communal wellbeing simultaneously. Getting involved ticks all the boxes that the literature tells us really improves life satisfaction: giving, being active, connecting, taking notice and learning. Papers are currently full of politicians and business people encouraging us to shop Britain back to its feet. But if we want the nation to stand up and be a truly big society, it's time that we need to spend with each other, not reward points in supermarkets.
Behaviour expressive of certain values tends to form a self-reinforcing loop. Hence, appealing to self-seeking, materialistic gain, makes people less likely to be communally and altruistically motivated. Conversely, being involved in a collective enterprise tends to make us less self-absorbed and more likely to be positively inclined to take part in a "big society". For example, it was the experience of "national unity" during war time, writes the historian Paul Addison, that laid the cultural and political foundations to build a more caring society fit for returning heroes after 1945.
In short, appeal to self-interested individualism and you will get self-interested individuals. Emphasise the intrinsic and mutual benefits of common endeavour and you will begin to grow a nation where people are more inclined to look out for each other.
Effectively paying people to be good citizens can also directly backfire. A classic study looked at the results of different approaches to blood donation in the UK, where people volunteer and in the United States where they got paid. In the US, research by the rightwing Institute of Economic Affairs theorised that paying donors was the way to increase supply. Subsequent analysis by Richard Titmuss found the opposite. Not only did more people give blood when it was unpaid, but that voluntarily donated blood was of a higher quality.
The financial incentive increased dishonesty among donors who lied more often about their health conditions. Titmuss concluded: "Commercialisation of blood and donor relationships represses the expression of altruism." It was a classic and common error. Think of how you feel when good friend invites you to dinner. Now imagine how you would feel if the same friend offered to pay you to go to dinner with them? Relationships nurtured by open gift giving and reciprocity differ from commercial ones. It's the difference between a loving relationship and prostitution.
Economics, too, often boils human relationships down to a caricature of self-interest and competition. In justification, it invokes misappropriated Darwinian notions of "survival of the fittest". But, this misses the equally successful evolutionary strategies of collaboration, symbiosis and co-evolution. Co-operative companies, tellingly, weathered the recession better than others.
The proposed hook-up with commercial, supermarket-based reward cards also appears self-defeating. The point of a big society is an active, engaged citizenry. But research on the impact of big stores on communities shows that their dominant presence can reduce voter turnout. They do so by unweaving the tighter social fabric that grows in more diverse economies. As more of every pound spent by shoppers stays locally if the shops are locally owned and operated, encouraging the opposite will drain not invigorate a big society. It gets more personal, too. Because of their socially alienating store formats, large chain stores even reduce the number of conversations people have while shopping, further dissolving the social glue.
Yet, a further worry might be the disturbing potential for data convergence that would occur once the enormous power of commercial store cards are combined with the personal and other information that government authorities hold on people.
I think it is far more likely that people don't vote with their feet to build the big society due to a lack of time, rather than financial or material incentive.
Recession and chronic public spending cuts are set to hugely stress social cohesion. And, there will be large numbers of people in structural unemployment (probably blamed for their fate) and many, many others working ever longer to stay afloat.
The big society needs more time banks where people swap time and skills, and a shorter working week, underpinned by sufficient safety nets, to create the conditions for a big society. Engaging vastly more people in helping communities to function will not only radically reduce costs (although that is not the reason to do it), it will enormously improve the quality of neighbourhood life, raising individual and communal wellbeing simultaneously. Getting involved ticks all the boxes that the literature tells us really improves life satisfaction: giving, being active, connecting, taking notice and learning. Papers are currently full of politicians and business people encouraging us to shop Britain back to its feet. But if we want the nation to stand up and be a truly big society, it's time that we need to spend with each other, not reward points in supermarkets.
Andrew Simms @'The Guardian"
Per Bojsen-Moller - The Greatest Dub Techno mix in the World... Ever!
1 - Rhythm & Sound w/ Jah Batta - Music Hit You [Burial Mix]
2 - Rhythm & Sound - No Partial [Rhythm & Sound]
3 - Rhythm & Sound w/ The Chosen Brothers - Mash Down Babylon [Burial Mix]
4 - Rhythm & Sound - Outward [Rhythm & Sound]
5 - Maurizo - M4 [Maurizio]
6 - Basic Channel - Quadrant Dub II [Basic Channel]
7 - Round One ft. Andy Caine - I'm Your Brother [Main Street Records]
8 - Maurizio - M4.5 [Maurizio]
9 - Carl Craig - The Climax (Basic Reshape) [Planet E]
10 - Rhythm & Sound w/ Tikiman - Music A Fe Rule [Rhythm & Sound]
11 - Rhythm & Sound - Smile w/ Savage [Rhythm & Sound]
12 - Rhythm & Sound - Carrier [Rhythm & Sound]
13 - Maurizio - Domina (Maurizio Mix) [Maurizio]
14 - Rhythm & Sound - Queen In My Empire Version [Burial Mix]
15 - Rhythm & Sound w/ Cornell Cambell - King In My Empire [Burial Mix]
16 - Maurizio - M5 [Maurizio]
17 - Rhythm & Sound - Range [Rhythm & Sound]
18 - Rhythm & Sound w/ Tikiman - Why [Burial Mix]
19 - Rhythm & Sound - Free For All Version [Burial mix]
20 - Rhythm & Sound w/ Paul St. Hilaire - Free For All [Burial mix]
21 - Round Two ft. Andy Caine - New Day [Main Street Records]
22 - Maurizio - M6 [Maurizio]
23 - Rhythm & Sound - Mango Drive [Rhythm & Sound]
24 - Basic Channel - Q1.1 [Basic Channel]
25 - Rhythm & Sound - See Mi Version (Basic Reshape) [Burial Mix]
26 - Maurizio - M7 (Unreleased Mix) [Maurizio]
27 - Round Three ft. Tikiman - Acting Crazy [Main Street Records]
28 - Round Four - Found A Way [Main Street Records]
29 - Rhythm & Sound w/ Tikiman - Never Tell You [Burial Mix]
30 - Rhythm & Sound w/ The Chosen Borthers - Making History [Burial Mix]
via kfmw
EDit:
mixed by Per Bojsen-Moller aka mirrorcube
Joy Division by Kevin Cummins
Although they only released two albums during their short run, Joy Division remains one of the most important and beloved bands of the late-’70s post-punk movement, influencing generations of cold, black-clad imitators. In the three decades since Ian Curtis’s death, he has become one of music’s darkest and most solemnly worshiped cult figures. He has been immortalized in countless books and films, printed on all kinds of T-shirts, and his song “Love Will Tear Us Apart” probably holds some kind of record for teenage mixtape overuse.
But even if you think you’ve seen enough of Joy Division to last you a lifetime, you’ll want to make space for Kevin Cummins’s Joy Division (Rizzoli New York, 2010), a book that combines the author’s striking black-and-white images of the band with photos of their instruments, set lists, and flyers, and Curtis’s lyrics and notebooks.
It’s illuminating, as a fan, to examine Curtis’s cross-outs and fun to ogle the concert flyers and fantasize about having attended those shows. Equally absorbing is an unexpected, pitch-perfect foreword by Jay McInerney, who talks about blasting Closer while he wrote Bright Lights, Big City. And the inclusion of a long discussion between Cummins and Bernard Sumner is a great music-nerd read.
But it’s Cummins’s photos, each blown up to fill an entire, large page, that make the book essential for all Joy Division lovers. Known for his photography of the Manchester music scene, Cummins shows the band against the stark backdrop of the dying industrial city in winter, its old churches, plain residential buildings, roads, and (in one famous series) bridges covered in a thin blanket of snow. There are plenty of concert shots here, but it’s the intimate portraits of individual band members (Curtis especially) in their dusty, paper-strewn practice space and those photos of the band around Manchester that hit the hardest.
Judy Berman @'Flavorwire'
Street Art Way Below the Street
A vast new exhibition space opened in New York City this summer, with a show 18 months in the making. On view are works by 103 street artists from around the world, mostly big murals painted directly onto the gallery’s walls.
It is one of the largest shows of such pieces ever mounted in one place, and many of the contributors are significant figures in both the street-art world and the commercial trade that now revolves around it. Its debut might have been expected to draw critics, art dealers and auction-house representatives, not to mention hordes of young fans. But none of them were invited.
In the weeks since, almost no one has seen the show. The gallery, whose existence has been a closely guarded secret, closed on the same night it opened.
Known to its creators and participating artists as the Underbelly Project, the space, where all the show’s artworks remain, defies every norm of the gallery scene. Collectors can’t buy the art. The public can’t see it. And the only people with a chance of stumbling across it are the urban explorers who prowl the city’s hidden infrastructure or employees of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority.
That’s because the exhibition has been mounted, illegally, in a long-abandoned subway station. The dank, cavernous hall feels a lot farther than it actually is from the bright white rooms of Chelsea’s gallery district. Which is more or less the point: This is an art exhibition that goes to extremes to avoid being part of the art world, and even the world in general...
Continue reading
Jasper Rees @'NY Times'
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
