Cultural Movements and Social Trends

Recently, I have been reflecting upon my role in several recent cultural movements. To be more precise, I have noted that my involvement seems to signal the relative success of the particular movement. I recognize that this is a heavily anthropic observation, but then the beauty of the anthropic principle is that it requires self-reflection by definition.

I won’t make a detailed history of this, but here are the broad strokes. As a gamer, I have enjoyed the ongoing development and mainstream acceptance of role-playing games. I participated in the popularization of Japanese animation in the West and thus the renewed interest in all forms of cinematic animation. In a small way, I also helped bring about the current renaissance in Western swordsmanship and sword making. Most recently, I have become an active participant in the right-to-arms movement, now entering a revolutionary stage in the United States.

While none of these movements have attained complete cultural normalization, all have made great strides in that direction. I also cannot definitively say that my participation has been a factor in their successes. However, I can say that, so far, my involvement is indicative of impending success, which brings us back to the anthropic principle.

Speaking more broadly, I also find myself part of various social trends. These differ from cultural movements in that they generally lack group cohesion and internal organization, but they can be very significant nonetheless. I’ve written about some of these in the past, including the ongoing information revolution and the new baby boom. Another example is the increasing numbers of interracial marriages and families. Here, I have my Chinese-Indonesian wife and our beautifully mixed daughter, and there are at least three other similar families in our small neighborhood.


All of this leads me to wonder about the future. In this era of rapid social and cultural change, what will happen next? Will my wandering attention predict success or failure?

Well, that’s enough self-aggrandizement for one day.

Facebook

I said that I would try to be less stubborn about new information technology, so I’ve finally joined a social-networking site. That is Facebook in this case, since some folks have been pestering me with invitations, and I see that many of my friends and family have already joined.

What’s this all about? The idea is to make finding and connecting with friends and associates easier. Of course, anyone looking for me can find me with any search engine.

Nevertheless, I’ll give this social-networking business a try, though I can’t imagine using Facebook as much more than a pointer to my more formal on-line endeavors. Time will tell.

Fighting for the Right to Arms in California

Scarcely two weeks have passed since the historic ruling in Nordyke v. King incorporated the Second Amendment in California, but unconstitutional gun-control laws and regulations are already being challenged. The Second Amendment Foundation and the Calguns Foundation have filed two lawsuits in federal court. Peña, et al. v. Cid attacks California’s roster of approved handguns as a de facto ban on common defensive weapons, while Sykes, et al. v. McGinness, et al. challenges the outdated and arbitrary application of the state’s discretionary handgun-licensing system.

The constitutional questions raised in both cases were addressed by last year’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling in D.C. v. Heller, so positive outcomes seem likely. The real question may only be how long it takes for the litigation to be resolved. I don’t expect victory to take more than 10 years, but it could come much more quickly than that.

It has been suggested that the right-to-arms movement in California has allies in high places. I have to wonder if these lawsuits wouldn’t provide the political cover for such allies to issue new, more reasonable interpretations of our current laws … in light of Second Amendment incorporation. Why not spare the state, counties, and municipalities from costly litigation?

The Financial Crisis Simplified

Here is a visualization that explains the current financial crisis clearly and concisely.

The Crisis of Credit Visualized from Jonathan Jarvis on Vimeo.

However, I also have to point out that the private sector is not solely responsible for the mess. The government did its part to set the stage by artificially inflating housing prices through poor but well-intentioned regulations.

A Small Victory for Privacy Rights

Amid all the other excitement this week, I almost overlooked another civil-rights victory. In Arizona v. Gant, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that police need a warrant to search the vehicle of someone they have arrested, if that person poses no threat to officers. While this decision doesn’t moot searches for “officer safety” permitted under Terry v. Ohio, it is a small step forward for Fourth Amendment protection of privacy rights.

Watch where you park.

The Information Revolution

By now, it should be clear that an information revolution is in progress. Just 15 years ago, information was still a relatively scarce and well-controlled commodity. The economic and legal barriers to reaching a wide audience were substantial, and access to information and other intellectual capital required persistence or money or both.

That has all changed. Now, information is abundant and often available at little or no cost to the user. The institutional barriers that once controlled the flow of information have been largely circumvented. The information economy is rapidly adjusting, and the value of intellectual capital is falling—but that is a topic for another post.

The mainstream media are struggling to adapt to the new paradigm. Where once the publishers controlled the supply of information and thus the architecture of any related public debate, the consumers have now freed the market. Web logs and on-line discussion forums now rapidly spread the news that some traditional media outlets still try to conceal, minimize, or distort due to their own political agendas.

Yesterday’s historic court decision in Nordyke v. King is a perfect example. This morning, there is nothing in the Los Angeles Times on the story, but there is an article about the 10th anniversary of the shootings at Columbine High School and the drive for tougher gun-control laws. In contrast, the right-to-arms community on the Internet knew about the decision within minutes of its announcement, and we had known that it was coming for months.

Similarly, ABC’s recent gun-control propaganda piece was a traditionally massive exercise in broadcast “journalism.” It might have stood on its own, but on-line communities mounted an immediate challenge. Discussion forums and web logs quickly and effectively refuted ABC’s deceptive, politically motivated reporting.

And who can forget that it was bloggers who took down CBS’s Dan Rather? A distinguished journalist ended his career in disgrace, because he let his political agenda get in the way of his objectivity … and because he failed to realize that his powerful television network no longer controlled the information.

This then is the true power and promise of the Web 2.0 paradigm. Information wants to be free.

The Second Amendment Comes to California

Today, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled that “the Fourteenth Amendment [to the U.S. Constitution] incorporates the Second Amendment and applies it to the states and local governments.” While 14th Amendment incorporation is a profanely legalistic concept, the way has now been opened to challenge unconstitutional gun-control statutes and regulations in California and beyond. The case in question was Nordyke v. King.

In a clever bit of jurisprudence, the court ruled against the plaintiffs (gun-show organizers) while settling the incorporation matter. Alameda County was the “winner,” so it cannot appeal the decision. The right to arms is now the law of the land, at least for much of the western United States.

This is wonderful news for the civil-rights movement, but the fight is really only just beginning. Prepare for an onslaught of litigation over the next few years.