Dear Senator Durbin:

As an Internet professional and a near-continuous user of all the wonderful benefits brought to us by this amazing technology, I urge you to oppose the SOPA and PIPA acts currently being debated in Congress. As a former employee of several online magazines, I fully recognize the need to fight piracy of intellectual property, but this poorly written legislation will break the fundamental structures of the Internet and will serve as a dangerous permission slip for private-industry censorship of websites without any due process. Please vote to protect America’s most dynamic economic sector, the interactive industry, by opposing this legislation and any attempts to clamp down on the economic freedom of the Internet.

Sincerely,
Patrick Stack
Chicago, IL

So get on Google’s anti-SOPA/PIPA page and register your opposition. Take it from an Internet dude – you don’t want this to pass.

I’ve pinned it down to the fact that TV takes away the emphasis on idea exchange by adding in the visual element. If I’m making judgments about some proposed initiative that matters to me, I don’t want any of a number of talking heads all up on my screen trying to force me into thinking one way or another. Let me read what I want and process it rather than adding in the specific face I’ll end up wanting to punch — that just clouds my judgment. This argument isn’t to pretend that the Internet isn’t full of blathering, shouting morons, because any comments section is almost instantly infected by their vitriol and mistyped ooze. But when the most in-your-face communication these screamers can use is to type in all caps, it really doesn’t take much to brush past the bullshit online.

I’ll make the counterintuitive case that the Internet actually makes us more rational towards the issues than we were in the TV era — sure, it’s easy to fall into an echo chamber almost anywhere online, but how many people now are at least using some semblance of “facts” instead of who has better hair? Keep your face out of my face, and we all benefit.

Like most Americans, I can instantly recall what I was doing, thinking and feeling on September 11, 2001. Within a year I was working for the national news media in a New York City still processing the attack, and the ongoing military response to that day has been at the center of my brother’s, brother-in-law’s and friends’ time in the service. It’s been a divisive decade for the United States, and we’re entering the 2010s arguing about how to reverse the demoralizing political and economic damage — much of it self-inflicted — that we still face today.

That ongoing trauma sparks two emotional reactions in our culture: reactive anger at all that’s happened and all the negativity we’ve had to endure, and grief for the trauma itself. Even at the early stages of the anniversary, these two emotions are guiding how we look back. Full-throated political commentary is plentiful about the events subsequent to Sept. 11th (Politico, Hitchens in Slate), but remembrances of the day itself are muted and emotional in a way that’s probably the only possible theme (NBC New York, the upcoming TIME special). It’s a delicate balancing act when approaching something visceral for all of us, and it’s what will guide this week online.

I was 21 on Sept. 11th, and my own past decade featured the myriad ups and downs that that time in life represents. As much negative emotion as Sept. 11th and the American experience since then has brought, and even with some of the tougher things that occurred in my own life in that time, there have been so many positive things that coincided. Humans can never eliminate the sadness that’s part of life and existence, and this commemoration is a powerful reminder of that. But I’m also quietly thankful that those positive things have still occurred despite the wider circumstances, and that keeps me going.

“Hi, USA? It’s your old buddy, Pakistan!

“Osama bin Laden in our country? As if! Hmm, it’s really a mystery where he is … don’t you guys hate Iran? I mean he’s gotta be there, right? The guy’s an icon of religious tolerance; surely he could have overcome the centuries-old Sunni/Shi’a divide.

“No, of course that’s not ridiculous. Which one of us lives in this part of the world? Come on, trust me.

“That enormous secured compound built four years after 9/11 in the sizable city of Abbottabad, which also has a huge Pakistani army base and military academy? You mean the compound where they burn their trash, and some tall guy in a camo jacket keeps ordering dialysis treatments? What can I say, you know these kids and their McMansions! It’s like a regular fraternity party in there. Imagine the heating bill for that place, am I right or what?

“By the way, can you spare a few billion dollars again for military aid? It would totally help me out in fighting these terrorists, bro. For real, I got your back.

“You know, because you’re such a great friend, I’m going to treat you to a special deal at our new venture, ISI Used Cars — I just got this shipment of ’83 Yugos that purr like a kitten, and they have your name written all over them. Consider it a favor for letting those drone strikes slide!

“Alright, I gotta get going to my meeting with the Taliban … oh jeez, did I say Taliban? I meant to say Talleyrand — I’ve really gotten into Bourbon Restoration re-enactment, so I’m going to this conference for Congress of Vienna enthusiasts. Should be a ton of waistcoats up in there.

“But for real, bro — you’re my ace and I love you like a brother. We are totally tight allies, for real. Catch you on the flip – Pakistan out!”

Once upon a time, and by that I mean just a few years ago, I used to get emotionally involved in national elections and politics. Then I thought hard about it, and I realized that caring about this stuff all the time impacts my daily life in pretty much one way: mental stress, because both my ability to impact national events and the likelihood of those national events changing significantly are just above nil. So I looked at it rationally and realized that there was little point to maintaining the same level of emotional involvement: I still vote, I still support ideas, and I still read a lot of news, but that’s really about it in terms of brainpower. There are things in life that I can control, so in mental-energy allocation, I stick to those.

This has had varying success: I think political interest is pretty ingrained in me by now, but for the most part, cynical-but-rational detachment has been pretty good to me. I like Obama, but he hasn’t failed my 2008 expectations because mine were pretty down-to-earth anyway. Now the zen thing seems to be working again: sure, I’m bummed that lots of voters apparently can’t figure out what they want out of government, but these supposedly world-shattering GOPers are going to go to DC, make a bunch of noise about deficits, and then cut absolutely nothing meaningful in federal spending while actually worsening the deficit situation through further tax cuts. (This is actually in line with what the public wants, though, so you can’t accuse them of selling out their constituents.) In other words, nothing will change until the country is somehow forced to change, and we aren’t there yet. (Which is good.) In the meantime, one party won’t even consider logical steps like means testing, while the other party seems to think revenue is somehow unimportant to solvency. Caring about these illogical people all the time makes sense for one’s daily existence? I think not.

On the contrarian increased-involvement side, now that I’m a homeowner and have put down some roots in a city, I finally pay a lot of attention to local politics. So in that sphere, which does impact my life directly, I’ve now started to care significantly. But for the “tidal wave” and “historic permanent shift” and all that: I await the next permanent shift in 2012, and then the one in 2014. Meantime, I got work to do.

In effect, a large part of our political class is showing its priorities: given the choice between asking the richest 2 percent or so of Americans to go back to paying the tax rates they paid during the Clinton-era boom, or allowing the nation’s foundations to crumble — literally in the case of roads, figuratively in the case of education — they’re choosing the latter.

“America Goes Dark”, NY Times

Chicago: let’s do this.

Salon.com: The healthcare bill: 10 things you need to know

Also, if this bill — which relies on market exchanges and doesn’t have a government-run plan — is what passes as “socialist”, the word has truly lost all meaning.

President Obama to deliver U-M spring 2010 commencement address

Yet before I think this is too cool, it’s only for the undergrad graduation, as the b-school graduation is April 30. Regardless, that is one serious publicity coup for UMich. Way to go, Blue.

UPDATE: Seems grad students get four tickets after all. Sweet.

1. Abraham Lincoln. Probably a cliché, but that’s a good thing.
2. Benjamin Franklin. Smart, practical, and clearly a cool dude for a party.
3. Teddy Roosevelt. Easily the most bad-ass liberal President.

Other nominees?