Hair

During the Vietnam War era, young men who opposed the war and did not want to be drafted into the military, either fled to Canada, or joined the National Guard in the hope of avoiding the draft. Another way was to express opposition was "hair," long hair was a political statement. Men with beards and with long head hair were assumed to be in opposition to the U.S. war in Vietnam. Today, it seems like facial hair is back, but the reason is unclear. With some frequency many men today seem to be attracted to facial hair, not beards, but a week or so of no shaving. This phenomenon seems to especially prominent on TV, where men who are advertising products  have the unshaven look. Why do the TV advertisers believe that viewers will be more  attracted to products if the person holding the product, or pointing to it, has not shaved for a week or so?

My colleague, Rich Hogan, recommended several articles that might help: Leslie A. Zebrowitz, Reading Faces: Window to the Soul?, Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1997; Rebekah Herrick, Jeanette Morehouse Mendez, Ben Pryor, "Razor's Edge: The Politics of Facial Hair," Social Science Quarterly, v. 96, #5, November 2015: 1301-1313.

I will look at this literature; in the meantime, tell me what you think.

Hedgehogs and Foxes

In 1953 the political philosopher Isaiah Berlin published a book in which he discussed two styles of work by scientists or academics or anyone engaged in sustained intellectual thought. The idea for these two styles came from an ancient Greek poet, and Berlin made them come to life in a lively and playful way. They are the hedgehog and the fox. As Berlin put it: "The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing." Over time, the hedgehog will become more well-known for its achievements, but it will be at the expense of a very boring intellectual life. In contrast, the fox will explore a wide range of topics over time, but will never become as well-known as the hedgehog.

As academics, we have seen Berlin's two characters many times among our colleagues. Although most do not do enough scholarly work to even be in the game, the most productive scholars may be found in one of the animal phyla. For Robert and Carolyn, we have been foxes for most of our careers, darting from topic to topic over time, but never really being recognized and becoming a "contenda" (to quote Marlon Brando from the film On the Waterfront).

Robert has discussed different research styles in a course on publishing in sociology, and in talks that he has given to new graduate students in his department.

This blog by Carolyn and Robert is clearly the work of a pair of "foxes," but it gives us pleasure.

You will spend a night in the box!

Robert just had the chance to see Cool Hand Luke on the Turner Classics channel. For those who remember the 1967 film and the memorable non-conformist character of Luke played by Paul Newman, the memorable take-away line is usually "what we have here is a failure to communicate" spoken by the warden as he heaps additional punishments on Luke each time he defies authority and tries to remain an individual. For me, the take-away from the film was that each time Luke defies authority he will "spend a night in the box," a small human-size metal closed cage that barely allows the inhabitant to sit with legs pulled up to one's chest. The message for all of us ordinary folk is that if you fail to follow the orders of the legally established warden, or police officer, or teacher, or president--you will spend a "night in the box." The people at Waco spent a "night in the box." The people at Ruby Ridge spent a "night in the box." And if you don't pay your taxes because you believe that they are used to support unjust wars, you will spend a "night in the box."

If you saw the film, what was your "take away."

Culture or Structure & Development

I just listened to several interviews with DACA young people on NPR. These young people were in every way extraordinary: motivation, knowledge, skills. Given what we know about the role of nature and nurture in shaping the lives of the young, the DACA students must have had parents who are as extraordinary as their offspring. Given this possibility, why aren't the countries from which they came as developed economically as the countries in which they seek their new homes. The answer cannot reside in the skills, talents, and motivations of the people, that is, in their culture. We must look elsewhere, like the qualities of their leaders, their economic policies, and the helpful or harmful economic policies of their trading nations.

History is Dangerous

I have just read, for the first time, that eleven Italian immigrants were lynched by a mob in New Orleans in 1891. They had just been acquitted of involvement in the shooting of a police official. Apparently, the mob didn't agree with the verdict. I was doing this deep reading in order to better understand my deceased mother's pre-occupation with being an American. Although she was born in this country, and was an American, her parents were immigrants, and my mother was married to my father who came from Italy at the age of four, and who was technically an immigrant. What I learned from this "deep reading" was that the 1920-30s was a period of anti-immigration sentiment following the massive legal immigration to the United States. This anti-immigrant sentiment must have been a part of the reason why my mother changed her first name, to sound more American, and eventually changed her last name on her Social Security card because she thought she would have a better chance of finding a good job.

This led me to contrast the anti-immigration sentiment of the 1920-30s with what we experiencing today. Something to think about.

Secret Society?

This is an unfolding story so it is just the beginning and we do not know where it will go next. We have often heard of references to the "deep state," which has usually meant for us the existence of the "permanent" officials of state agencies that continue in place while elected politicians of both parties come and go. The existence of a "deep state" is troubling and it erodes the existence of trust between the public and its elected officials. However, we now have reported the existence of a memo exchanged between two FBI officials that makes reference to a "secret society," (to which they presumably belong) and which one FBI agent thinks should meet to discuss some new item of concern. This is deeply troubling, and makes the "deep state" scenario look like "business as usual," while a "secret society" is a threat to the very meaning of democracy.

Stay tuned. This is an unfolding story. Track it on your own through whatever media sources you use on a regular basis.

Update 1/25/18: Latest news report on the "secret society" email: the two FBI officials who made mention of the "secret society" were known to have emailed each other with some frequency. It now appears that these messages between the two FBI officials over a five-month period cannot be found. This only serves to keep the spotlight on the question of the meaning of a "secret society." This is a very partisan issue, so it is wise to wait and look at all documents before drawing any conclusions.

Update 1/26/18: Our local newspaper reported today that the missing emails between two FBI officials have been found. We can now find out if the "secret society" statement was an in-house joke or whether it has legs.

Update 5/5/18: This is a no-news update. Will we ever learn anything more about the alleged "secret society." I don't think so.

Update 2/9/18: We said this was an unfolding story, but we didn't know it would be this slow. We think that the release of the memo by the Republicans has made all the power centers nervous because they are all implicated by their actions or inactions. Thus, the FBI, DOJ, Big Media, Democrats, and Republicans are moving slowly because they lack full control over the story. Thus, the discussion of "secret society" has disappeared, or moved into a category of  an inside "joke" that the two parties enjoyed, but which is reported to be fiction. So all we can do is to stay tuned, but remember that inaction going forward may also be revealing.

Update 6/15/18: The report on the FBI and DOJ that was released today suggests the existence of a lot of activity inside these two agencies to protect their interests, which may be as low-level as protecting your job and pension, or as high level as advancing the interests of one political faction or party over the interests of an opposing party or faction. But we must still be careful as to whether what was revealed in the FBI/DOJ report are the actions of a "ruling class" or the actions of a "political and economic elite." The "ruling class" argument is supported by apparent FBI/DOJ actions to support a past president and undercut an elected president. I am still inclined to lean toward the "elite" conclusion because their actions sometimes seem very petty and smell of inter-group politics. The one big loser identified in today's FBI report is one of the FBI agents (Peter S.) who appears to be a first-class creep capable of a variety of actions to advance or protect very petty political interests. He is the kind of person who should never serve in any government position.

Personal Consumption and Climate Change

The February 18, 2018 issue of In These Times has an article entitled "Ban Yachts, Not Burgers" that examines the role of personal consumption styles and the climate crisis. For me, the significance of the article is that it brings the views of the "right" and the "left" together when they identify the role of the consumption lifestyle of the wealthy, in addition to multinational corporations, as responsible for carbon emissions. Put in on your reading list.