You may have heard that the United States is about rugged individualism, but no more. For the last couple of decades, American teachers have embraced a bold new model called cooperative learning (or sometimes team learning), a research-proven method that benefits students, or at least many students. My politically philosophical articles tend to be of the “Chicken Little” sort, where I claim the sky is falling. Not here, since Cooperative Learning is not a new idea. It is a fait accompli embraced by virtually all primary and secondary school teachers and by an entire generation of our youth now coming of age and themselves becoming teachers. The sky has already fallen while we weren’t looking and it is time to analyze the consequences. I think they include putting half our population at a disadvantage and potentially destroying our very brightest.

Discussion Questions:

1. Do you think the author is being sarcastic here?

2. Can you think of any potential problems with cooperative learning?

3. What can possibly be wrong with helping each other and working things out together?

4. Why are fewer students studying science and engineering?

Click to read more ...

I am reading Liberal Fascism by Jonah Goldberg, which argues very convincingly that modern liberalism is the direct heir of fascism. This was a theory I mentioned in another article, so I searched Amazon for supporting evidence, which Goldberg supplies in abundance and which I will outline here along with my own take on why this matters.

Why this article probably does not matter is spreading the word about Goldberg’s excellent book, since approximately no one visits this site. If you are reading this, you pretty much do not exist. My readership is confined to 1) my wife, 2) people searching for images, and 3) a very few people who Google has failed to persuade to read elsewhere. Google’s page rank for Unpopular Ideas (an automated judge of site “quality”) is just 2 out of 10, probably because virtually no one links here. It’s as if most readers assume “unpopular” means “untouchable”, or at least “unlinkable”. If you disagree and have some kind of relevant web presence, please promote Unpopular Ideas with link. Thanks!

In any case, read on to find out why “unpopular” and “fascist” are pretty much opposites and why left-wing popular opinion owes a lot to supposedly right-wing fascism. I’ll also explain why the continuing existence of hidden fascism today argues for my own radical conception: a constitutional government without laws.

Click to read more ...

I recently saw Avatar, the 3D film by James Cameron, who last did Titanic over a decade ago. I am probably the only person in America who never saw Titanic, but not because I heard anything bad about it. I just don’t enjoy tragedies, probably because I find the real world depressing enough. But Avatar is different (though Cameron is still going for the pithy one-word titles). No sad ending here.

Avatar is a wonderful in the true sense of the word because more than ever before, it immerses us with wonder in a new world. The experience was like my first viewing of Star Wars in 1977, another wonder for its time. Cameron’s masterpiece combines amazingly realistic computer animation, 3D projection, science fiction, a morality play, a war, and of course, a love story. I was especially impressed with the awe inspiring scale and detail of Avatar’s forest world. 3D viewing adds a third dimension, but Avatar’s imaginary world adds yet another dimension of the vertical, with immense trees, branch-bound paths, and floating mountains.

The simple plot includes moral editorial on environmentalism and colonialism, with earth folk, and specifically a large avaricious corporation, wearing the black hat. There is nothing wrong with art that makes a strong moral statement, even if it is not the statement I would choose. That is the prerogative of the artist. Starkly dividing good from evil probably helps immerse us in Avatar’s world by alienating us from our own. So I am not criticizing the artist here.

The point I’ll make is that we viewers must exercise care, since morality plays, even if good art, can influence us in not-so-good ways. Stories with a moral are fiction. When we internalize a fictional morality without some reality checking, I think we are more prone to real world evil. So read on for my moralizing on the possibly morale consequences of morality fiction. Also, for any who are interested, I’ll end with a short summary of cinematic 3D technology.

Click to read more ...

My apologies to Robert Frost, but I just rewrote his poem:

Some say the world will end in fire,
Some say in ice.
From what I know of human fads,
I think the experts are all mad.
Especially those who hold with fire,
Because their email shows they’re liars.

Is global warming real or is it a religion? If you believe, it is very real and something must be done. The solution requires that we all make sacrifices, not just true believers. So if your beliefs are wrong, the results could be evil, or at least expensive.

This is the second of three articles on fanaticism and morality. In Conservation and Conservatism, I argued that art can distort our view of reality, causing “religious” beliefs that allow good people to harm others. Here, I’ll explain why we are prone to irrational beliefs and why “Global Warming” might be more religion than reality.

Click to read more ...

Today’s lecture is likely to be a highly unpopular one. I will argue that evil is among us and that we good people are the cause. Moreover, I’ll try to show that it is our own best intentions that are most likely to lead to evil outcomes. It is all the fault of our religious impulse, the very same human impulse behind formal religions like Judaism and Christianity, yet also the impulse behind both the Nazi and Communist parties and their genocides. Worse, I think this evil impulse is still alive and well in the guise of modern liberalism.

People really get mad when you accuse them of doing wrong, especially if the criticism has some ring of truth. So I’m going to start with a little humor to lighten things up. That way, y’all think I’m just a regular folksy kind of guy and may be marginally less likely to mail me letter bombs and/or throw me into some deep dungeon.

Q. How many liberals does it take to screw up a light bulb?

A. A majority in Congress.

Click to read more ...

My unpopular idea for today is going to shock some of my fans, for I’m arguing that capitalism may have its limits, that whatever its merits, seemingly bad long term outcomes are still possible. Specifically, I’ll explain why I think market forces doom my own industry and most creative professional fields. What we create is increasingly 100% digital. Software, literature, news, music, movies and indeed all sorts of artistic endeavor are headed for an entirely digital future. But at the same time, the march of technology means it is becoming virtually free to make copies of digital works. 100% digital media cost nothing to reproduce, which reduces the perceived value. When we paid for entertainment, news, computer applications and other information in the past, we mostly thought we were purchasing the medium, the physical book, magazine or disc which cost something to make. Cheap computers and digital content mean zero variable costs plus low fixed and entry costs. So most intellectual pursuits are headed toward a digital future with much lower rewards.

Q. Steve, it is clear to me that you are onto something. I mean, a future with free music and movies sounds dreadful, not to mention all the poor starving software engineers. Whatever shall we do?

A. What is needed are wise elite thinkers such as myself, who can step in and set things right. People with compassion for the underdog, liberal humanitarians with the best interests of all mankind (and of course womankind too) at heart, those with a keen understanding of the problems and how we can fix them through benign government administration and incentives. Yea, an entirely new and thoroughly modern dictatorship of the proletariat (with a few humble administrators like myself).

Q. Great idea, Steve! Why didn’t I think of that?

A. Such things are best left to intellectuals. Fortunately, I am here to serve, wisely advancing the interests of all you little people.

Q. And how should we address your excellency?

A. Wise Helpful Operator Of Public Systems. WHOOPS for short.

As you probably guessed, I will not argue we should scrap capitalism. While I see some possibly bad consequences that capitalism has in store for people, it is still a far better system that any alternative I know. For one thing, you may not share my values so and so a future constructed in my best interests probably would not be in your best interests. But even if our interests align, never forget that power corrupts and that absolute power corrupts absolutely. Give anyone enough power, even someone as obviously kind, thoughtful and fair as myself, and you are in deep trouble. Put anyone in charge of the economy, no matter how intelligent and well meaning, and they will inevitably if unconsciously squander a good portion of your wealth.

What I will argue is that market forces are working to lessen the value of at least some creative pursuits. It is possible to predict things heading down that road, but it is probably impossible to predict whether we will reach some new equilibrium before we reach the the apparent destination. Economic dictatorship cannot help us, but possible future changes in public values and opinions might eventually restore some economic power to creators of digital content. Along the way, I will also describe how some anti-piracy software works and explain why it does not work very well.

Click to read more ...

Someone I know cannot get a job. Potential employers simply never ever respond to his submitted resume. To protect this individual’s privacy, I will not divulge his name here, except to say that it’s me.

This has been happening for years, so it may not be the result of our current economic downturn. Something else is probably going on and there are numerous possibilities. It might be my unpopular ideas, though how would most potential employers know? It might be because I have basically been unemployed for decades, for I have been running my own companies since 1983. It might be that I am unqualified for contemporary software engineering jobs. Though I like to think a degree from MIT with a perfect GPA should count for something, even if it was thirty years ago. It might even be that I am over qualified for most software positions, because I also have a Harvard MBA and most MBA’s aspire to manage. It might be few managers can envision themselves working with some smart aleck who bandies about terms like Harvard, MIT and perfect grades. Finally, it might be age discrimination, since I am 53 years old when almost all programmers are in their twenties or maybe thirties.

I have a feeling that age discrimination is at least a contributing factor, but not the way you might assume. My theory is that the law against age discrimination is the problem. Ironically, age discrimination may be the unintended consequence of laws against age discrimination.

Click to read more ...

About once a week a stranger performs an act of kindness toward me on the road. Someone will pause at a light or stop sign and let me go first, even though they have the right of way. My usual response is not very gracious, though fortunately the other drivers cannot hear me swearing. Elsewhere I have argued that charity, that cornerstone of western morality, can be evil. Other than recommending me as a modern-day Scrooge, how are these connected? They illustrate an unpopular idea of mine, that liberals seem to side with the angels but often end up doing the devil’s work.

In modern usage, liberal and conservative are opposites. Liberals are for change, conservatives are not. Liberals favor helping the less fortunate while conservatives work for their own self interest. Liberals are intelligent and open to new ideas, being a strong majority in universities and other intellectual circles. Conservative circles include the Ku Klux Klan and those who disbelieve the theory of evolution. Sounds like the liberals win, right?

Brace yourself, for I will argue that liberals can be hypocrites that reduce freedoms and harm others for their own gain. Of course they are mostly unconscious of this and mostly have the best of intentions. But changing the world usually has unintended consequences and the unintended consequence of liberalism can be slavery in some degree.

Click to read more ...

A 1980’s Bloom County comic strip features a newspaper editor, typewriter and liquor bottle near at hand, composing an editorial. “It’s Reagan’s Fault. Everything’s Reagan’s Fault.” A lot of people still agree and Ronald Reagan’s supposed posthumous legacy now includes our current financial crisis. Let business run amok without adequate government oversight and greed has inevitably led to disaster. It just took a while.

I disagree and am more than a little suspicious that government oversight was the cause and not the solution. That Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were a disaster waiting to happen has long been clear to many, including me and I am no financial wizard. But Congressman Barney Frank, currently much in the news with calls for increased federal oversight of business, had this to say in 2003, “I want to roll the dice a little bit more in this situation towards subsidized housing.” The administration asked Congress to reign in quasi-governmental mortgage lenders in 2005, but that died when Senate Democrats filibustered.

So it appears that current problems were foreseeable and at least partially government responsibility. Of course banks were stupid too. But the stupidity of bankers is very old news and the new ingredient that pushed things over the edge this time appears to be political greed rather than greedy business. You may have noticed that the shit really hit the Wall Street fan within days of the government takeover of collapsing Fannie and Freddie. They have always been government sponsored and were very probably the catalyst for the current crisis.

But if the press blames Reagan, at least in Bloom County, then guess what? I think we might plausibly blame on the press this time. “It’s All Murdoch’s Fault!”, would be the headline, preferably on the front page of the Wall Street Journal.

Click to read more ...

My youngest daughter became bat mitzvah yesterday, so I guess it is a milestone in both of our lives. Parents are encouraged to address the synagogue congregation at these events and it has been my custom to try to say something both a little more humorous and a little more meaningful than the typical safe speech, which is often a short biography of the child who has just transitioned to a young Jewish adult. Though I admit that I try to keep such speeches from being too unpopular, so they are slightly off topic for this blog. But I think a few of the ideas may be worth preserving here. First comes yesterday’s speech for my younger daughter. Then below it, I will include the one I did five years ago for my older daughter.

Click to read more ...

As mentioned in the previous article, I’ve created a new diet. We live in southern New Hampshire on a lake with a beach. Well, it’s really a boat ramp and only a dozen feet wide. But it has sand and I think it qualifies. So I’m calling this the “South New Hampshire Beach Diet”. However, it is not a joke. It really works and is as close to effortless as anything I’ve ever experienced, culinary or otherwise.

Of course, it is not totally new, being “low carb” like the popular Atkins and South Beach diets. But my South NH Beach Diet has some important differences that I think make it superior, through potentially less popular. So this is yet another unpopular idea.

Click to read more ...

I’ve been eating differently and the results have been dramatic, one the few seemingly “miraculous” events in my life. It has been a diet of my own devising and I cover it the next article. But one cornerstone is that I stopped eating all starches and sugars. My theory is that a calorie is not really a calorie - that calories eaten have very little to do with calories of weight gain.

Conventional wisdom is that weight is ruled by energy balance. Calories consumed minus calories expended equals calories of fat gain. It is called conservation of energy, or sometimes the first law of thermodynamics. And it is beyond dispute that conservation of energy applies to all systems, including our bodies. Nevertheless, the conventional wisdom about calories, while very popular, is very wrong. At least that is my unpopular idea.

Click to read more ...

My mother recently died and the task of talking about her life fell to me at the memorial service. Though it is off topic even for a blog a wildly diverse as this one, I think she would have wanted some kind of permanent written record of her life (beyond the inevitable birth and death certificates that in the end are often all that survive). I certainly would if it were me.

Of course the question arises whether a blog offers any real permanence in the long term. It is a new literary form with evolving norms, but my guess is that many blogs will survive, possibly in third-party “way-back” style archives and probably because heirs may be reluctant to turn off and discard blogs when their authors die. I think it might become common for heirs to keep paying the small bills to keep the blog running as a memorial. And even if not, survivors might well copy at least some of the blog to other web sites.

So here is Lorraine Simonoff’s eulogy for posterity. Below that is another short eulogy I gave ten years ago for R. Leonard White, my wife’s father.

Click to read more ...

Yesterday was Thanksgiving. As we consumed our turkey and various veggie dishes, the subject of furs came up. Fur coats seem to be coming back into fashion a bit, but fashions have changed. After we old folks discussed whether it is economic to re-tailor old floor-length furs into shorter coats or stoles, I happened to ask my daughter whether she might want a fur trimmed coat for the upcoming gift-giving season. We have yet to come up with a “big holiday gift” for her and I’d seen some fur-trimmed leather vests at the mall that looked great. “No way”, was her response. Not even with fake fur? (I would probably be too cheap to get her the real thing in any case.) No, it’s just too politically incorrect for her and I can understand that. Popularity is important to our society, so important that it creates its own rational. So forget that we were consuming a murdered bird, that we all had no objection to wearing leather, and that the “fur” would probably come out of an oil well.

I’m not going to argue that killing animals for their fur should be moral. My daughter distinguishes killing for food from killing for more frivolous reasons and she has a point. My point, made at the table yesterday and the the assembled throngs of you reading this today, is that killing plants should be even less moral than killing animals for whatever reason. So maybe the real sin was that we had just murdered a wide assortment vegetables for our dinner.

Click to read more ...

Social Darwinism, Capitalism and Charity

I once made the mistake of proposing to our Rabbi that “Social Darwinism” might help explain Israel’s seemingly miraculous victories in the decades following World War II. After all, in addition to being very lucky, those that survived the Holocaust and made their way to Palestine were probably among the most persistent and enterprising of the Jews who lived in Europe before the war. It was a bad idea, or at least a highly unpopular one. I won’t try that one again here. But I will argue that a good form of Social Darwinism is alive and well in the guise of capitalism. Plus you’ll receive my even less popular critique of charity at no extra charge!

Click to read more ...

Some acquaintances of ours have a sign on their vehicle with a pie chart of government spending. It’s a big sign, occupying the whole side of their van plus a large sheet metal extension above their roof (which is very nicely done, though probably not very fuel efficient). So I guess they are making a big point. And the point seems to be that US military spending is over 50% of the total budget. As a country, we are spending half our resources on killing people in various ill advised foreign adventures. That’s a very bad thing, right?

Click to read more ...

Is death an acquired trait? We like to think of death as unavoidable. We believe that all things must die. It makes our own mortality easier to bear. Yet single-celled forms don’t necessarily ever die. They can beat the odds and indeed every surviving amoeba on earth has been alive billions of years. So maybe death is not inevitable and is just an evolutionary trait.

Click to read more ...

Our twelve month calendar might be the world’s oldest information data structure, save language itself. And it shows its age. How does it go? “Thirty days has September, April, June and November, all the rest have 31.” Except February, with 28 or 29 days. The number of days in a month varies and our seven-day week does not coincide with our months. Even if you know the date, you still have to ask the day of the week. There is an arguably better way, though it is probably too late to change.

Click to read more ...

Almost by definition, popular ideas are sort of boring. If we want something new and better, we must start with what’s currently out of fashion.

This site is called “Unpopular Ideas” because 1) I have noticed that many of my opinions have long been what you you might call non-mainstream and 2) the UnpopularIdeas.com domain was available. You many not agree with these essays. After all, they are unpopular ideas. But I hope you find them interesting and worth discussing.

Click to read more ...