Dodge City and Marshal Dillon

" The school-age population of Dodge City is 70 to 80 percent non-white, mainly Latino." That's from James Fallows writing about the impact of immigration to work in meat-packing plants in western Kansas.

Funny, I was thinking about Dodge City, which I've never visited, but I've spent many hours there. I was born early enough that we only had radio for entertainment, so the late 40's and early 50's I'd come home from school and listen to radio, also on the weekends.  I remember fondly "what evil lurks in the hearts of men, the Shadow knows", Sergeant Preston, Amos 'n Andy (I still think it was better than its historical reputation.  Around supper time there was "Our Miss Brooks" (an early feminist serial, IMHO, and One Man's Family.

But in 1952 Gunsmoke came on the air and quickly became a favorite.  Then late in the 50's we got TV and could see Matt Dillon, Kitty, Doc, Chester, and the others.  I recommend the wikipedia entry; the show was both very popular (the longest running show) and sometimes very liberal.  I wonder what today's historians are making of it.

Of course the Dodge City of Gunsmoke was different than the Dodge City of the 1880's, and different than today's Dodge City.  Things change.

Oh, and Marshal Dillon: he believed in strict gun control, no guns in town.

Funny on Trump

Too long for twitter:

"A New Verb in Mexico: Trumpear (From ‘to Punch’) http://nyti.ms/28MiEUv
In the state of Chihuahua in Mexico, an eatery is churning out Donald Trump tacos. They’re made with a lot of tongue, a dash of pig snout and just a little bit of cow brain."

I think too perfect to be true, but funny nonetheless.

Three Female Heads of Government?

This possibility was mentioned in a Washington Post piece on June 30. With Angela Merkel head of German government, Hillary Clinton currently favored to be elected president, and Theresa May the frontrunner for UK prime minister, we could see it happen.  Interesting to speculate on the impact on the dynamics of G-7, G-8, G-20, etc. etc. meetings which typically these days just have Merkel surrounded by business suits.

In this context I recall an article on Sen. Mikulski, who organized a weekly/monthly? luncheon for female senators which was credited with helping them to assume a greater role in the Senate. (IIRC she was an early, maybe the first elected female senator in the current era.  Just checked wikipedia--I thought maybe I was slighting Nancy Kassebaum (KS) and I was.  She and Hawkins were the female senators present when Mikulski was elected.)

Assuming it happens, I predict there will be multiple articles on the issue of how a common gender has affected the dynamics of the group.

[Corrected: Paula Hawkins served only one term, ending on the day Mikulski was sworn in.  So it was a bipartisan club of two from 1987 to 1992.]

The Iron Triangle: Modern Version

From a USDA press release:

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) today announced the availability of $8.4 million in competitive grants to support the work of partner organizations that provide training, outreach and technical assistance for socially disadvantaged, Tribal and Veteran farmers and ranchers. USDA's Outreach and Assistance for Socially Disadvantaged and Veteran Farmers and Ranchers Program, also known as the 2501 Program, is administered by the Office of Advocacy and Outreach (OAO).

In the old days the discussion of the Iron Triangle started with interest groups who had their representatives in Congress and worked with bureaucrats in the appropriate agency.  One classic example was the US Army Engineers: the interest groups were ad hoc organizations at the local level who wanted/needed a port to be dredged, a levee refurbished, a dam built.

The press release shows an updated version: the USDA agency is sponsoring these interest groups/nongovernmental organizations.  I suspect there little or no money going into their support from the individuals who they aim to serve (no dues-paying members).  Rather the funding is coming from charitable foundations and from the government.  While the activity is similar to the old Iron Triangle with each party (Congress, the bureaucracy, the private groups) getting something out of it, in this case one can argue that governmental functions are being out-sourced. It's no longer an educational agency of the government (Extension Service, NRCS, etc) educating; it's an intermediary semi-private "partner organization".

At least in this case there's likely a partisan cast--I doubt President Trump's Secretary of Agriculture would approve such aid.

FBI and Sentinel

I recall writing about the FBI's case management project back in the day.  Apparently they've learned some lessons on how to develop software, that is if one can trust this writeup.

Clinton and Emails

I may have written this before, but Clinton's behavior at State, at least as described in a recent summary of the aide's deposition, makes sense to me.  Bottomline: bigshots don't give a damn about systems and legalities.  It's the job of the bureaucracy around the bigshots to adjust the systems and legalities to what the bigshot wants.  Clinton wasn't going to devote any brain cells to worrying about the security status of what she writes or reads; she was focused on the content.  The exception to this is the initial discussion of the private server and Blackberry.  Then you're expecting a civil service bureaucrat to tell the big boss the rules and how to get around them.  Won't happen with many bureaucrats.

The big mistakes Clinton made was on insisting on a lot of close personal aides (Obama let her have more control over State personnel than is usual) so no one to say nay and on insisting on total control of release of emails. 

The big mistake we the public make is expecting that laws are self-enforcing; they require bureaucrats to say nay.

Translating the DofI Into Biology

Returning to Harari's  Sapiens, he compares the legal code of Hammurabi and the US Declaration of Independence.  One bit of the discussion is translating the opening of the declaration into biological reality.  So "all men are created equal" becomes "all men are evolved with differences".  That allows him to undermine equality, to declare it simply as one of his "imaginary realities", with no objective existence.

It's a cute trick, and thought-provoking, but it's not the only way to look at it.  One could say "all men are members of the same evolutionary species".  Seems to me that would allow one to reestablish an objective basis for an equality, even if it's not exactly the equality we're used to and like.

The Future of Agriculture: Floating Dairies

This makes a nice followup to yesterday's post on wired tomatoes: a floating dairy (in the Netherlands, of course).

The idea here is "circular farming", where manure from the dairy cows is captured and used to grow vegetables.  But the key thing seems to be the availability of open (water) space in an urban area.

Count me skeptical:  one reason is my memory of the flooding the Netherlands suffered back in the 1950's.  The water won't always be calm, and cows like humans can panic.  

The Future of Agriculture: Wired Tomatoes

This post at Technology Review describes the potential for really precision agriculture--essentially applying the "internet of things" to tomato growing in New England.  Did you know New England tomatoes are different than tomatoes grown elsewhere (as in warmer climates)?  There's potential for using technology to monitor growing tomatoes .

I suspect this represents one set of developments in future agriculture, where farmers lose their rednecks (I've got one--from bending over in the garden) by much more intensive use of technology. There will be a further bifurcation of farmers:

So on one hand we'll have the tech-farmers, investing more capital into much more precise control of growth.  I'd count the vertical farmers of leafy greens as other examples.  This agriculture will be seen as much less "natural" than today's.

On the other hand we'll have the artisan farmers, who will be more organic and grow more diverse crops (heirloom tomatoes, etc.)

Women's Work

Interesting post here describing research into "early modern" women's work in England.  Disrupts some stereotypes:

• Cooking wasn't much--a pot of stew on the fireplace to simmer for hours.
• Childcare wasn't much--go about your work and trust the child to stay out of trouble.
• Cleaning and washing weren't much--"cleanliness is next to Godliness" hadn't been invited.

Lot of consideration of market involvement.  Read the whole thing.