Global

Capitalism, as we all know, is a dandy system for creating wealth, but it doesn't do squat for social justice. No reason to expect it to -- that's not its job. Its moral imperative is: "Buy low, sell high."

Of course, there are corporate chieftains with social conscience, and many companies do a great deal of good in their communities beyond providing employment and making good widgets. But as we are so often reminded by heroes like "Chainsaw Al" Dunlop, a CEO's job is to increase corporate profits on behalf of the shareholders, period.

Unregulated capitalism is not a pretty sight, which is why we have labor laws, environmental regulations, health and safety standards, unions, much-eroded consumer protection laws, and other checks on the system. Barring a few glitches, like the fact that corporations keep buying our government, this is not a bad deal for lots of us, and it's not capitalism's job to help those who don't have enough power to deal with the system.

It would be helpful, however (from a PR standpoint if nothing else), if corporations would quit picking on poor people in particular.

I know -- one more opinion on Elian Gonzalez and you're going to urp. This case has been sliced and diced from points of view legal, psychological, political and international. It involves family values, family law, the Cold War, the presidential campaign, civil disobedience, hysteria, Fidel Castro, allegations of psychological abuse and heartless manipulation of a small child for political purposes. And, of course, the usual array of fully merited charges against the media for exploitation, unseemly mob scenes, callous disregard for the child's fragile emotional health and other gross behavior.

So naturally everyone has an opinion about it. We have even heard from some people with enough common sense to come in out of the rain. Or at least to remember the basic rules: Never play poker with a man called Doc; never eat at a place called Mom's; and never get involved in a family fight. This custody battle is a lot sadder than "Kramer vs. Kramer.

AUSTIN, Texas -- We could be watching one of those rare etymological events ("etymology": the history of a particular word, the study of historical linguistic change), as the meaning of a word changes before our eyes. Sort of like watching a species evolve or a tectonic plate move in real time.

We now have a politics that is about money, of money, by money and for money. How long can it be before the word "politics" comes to mean money?

A perfectly charming example, reported by Tim Golden in The New York Times, involves the Clinton administration's sudden shift of policy on buying helicopters to use in the drug war in Colombia. Since 1996, the administration has taken the position that a rebuilt version of the Huey, the old Vietnam workhorse, would do nicely.

According to Golden, a group of powerful congressional Republicans have "almost an obsession" about sending the fancier Blackhawk helicopter, which costs five times as much -- $1.8 million for a Huey II, $12.8 million for a Blackhawk. So for four years they've been fighting over this, with the political implication that anyone who's against spending more money is "soft on drugs."

Oh Elian, we love you! We're the News Media. And you're incredibly special.

Many politicians, legal experts, psychologists, celebrities and pundits have wanted the world to know that they fervently desire what's best for you. We've been glad to put you on national television -- live if possible -- playing on a backyard swing set or holding your pet rabbit named "Esperanza." Hope for your future has become very important to us all.

Frankly, kids your age usually aren't interesting to those of us in the media profession. They may suffer from danger and deprivation, but the chances are slim that a spotlight will fall on their unimportant little lives. What afflicts their daily existence is apt to be too downbeat and humdrum for prime time. There's no tragic shipwreck or high-profile legal battle to recount, just ongoing social conditions. Kind of boring.

Across the country, many gays are smarting after a hefty slab of California's voters took the opportunity last month to say "no, absolutely not" to the notion of gay marriage. But the dismay is tempered by other gays asking, "Why did we ever want the sacred institution in the first place?"

Still militantly campaigning for gay marriage is Eric Rofes, who teaches in the department of education at Humboldt State. Rofes says it's now time to take the gloves off. "Some of us have grown impatient, and are no longer satisfied with strategies which fail to directly confront mainstream resistance to same-sex marriage. We may take up the tactics most necessary for social change but largely absent from a contemporary queer movement comprised almost entirely of suit-and-skirt lobbyists, splashy television advertisements and upscale, black-tie dinner banquets."

LOS ANGELES -- There's a certain kind of anti-California prejudice that has always chapped my rear: "home of the fruits and nuts," "Berserkeley," "San Francisco Democrats." As though Alabama weren't a trifle strange and Utah didn't have its moments. Even (ahem) Texas ... On the other hand, you have to admit that something is happening here, and what it is, is entirely clear.

The peculiar sickness of California politics has been apparent for some time. Peter Schrag's book Paradise Lost: California's Experience, America's Future examines that illness closely.

Not that it is startlingly new -- all friends of California have been muttering for years now: "You fools, you fools. You had the finest system of public education in America, perhaps even the world. From kindergarten through graduate school, you had great schools, and you just threw them away -- the schools and everything else government used to do here. All because you wanted property tax relief."

Dear Iggy,

Greetings! My name is Floyd. I am a Chinese Water Dragon living in mid-central Ohio. I have quickly become a big fan of yours after reading only two articles written by you in the Columbus Free Press. I cannot begin to tell you how refreshing it is to read an animal rights column written by an animal, for the welfare of all animals!

I have an important animal rights issue to tell you about myself. It is an issue I rarely see anything written about, as well as one of great concern to my parents and myself: The care of reptiles being domesticated in these northern regions which normally belong to warner desert or jungle habitats.

As an American and a person passionately against racism, I say it is wrong for the battle flag of the Confederacy to be flown over the South Carolina statehouse building or any other. I am proud to agree with the 50,000 people who demonstrated on Martin Luther King Day demanding its removal. It is abominable that vestiges of it are in Georgia, Mississippi and other Southern state flags.

At the heart of this matter is what I am grateful to have learned from Aesthetic Realism, founded by America’s great poet and historian Eli Siegel, about the fight in every human being – in me – between respect for the world and contempt for it. “The deepest desire of every person,” Mr. Siegel explained, “is to like the world on an honest or accurate basis.” This desire is the source of art, kindness, truth, good sense in life and economics. He also explained the ugliest thing in people, causing every injustice, from a sarcastic insult, a “little lie,” to the deadly forms of crime, racism, war. It is contempt, “the addition to self through the lessening of something else.”

1980 – Public, educational and governmental access channels begin programming on Columbus’ cable systems.

1984 – Public access becomes a separate entity; a non-profit organization, Columbus Community Cable Access, Inc. (CCCA), is formed to administer the city contract funds. CCCA moves into 394 Oak Street and Carl Kucharski is hired as Executive Director.

The very definition of a “swing” state, Ohio has a record of backing presidential winners. The state’s varied population and economic base reflect a rough approximation of the nation as a whole, and its politics typically reflect national trends. Though every statewide elected office has been held by Republicans for several years, President Clinton still won the state in both of his elections. Ohio’s majority swings from one party to another, depending on the strength of the candidate and the hot issues of the day. This is similar to the split evidenced currently in national politics, where the White House and Congress are held by different parties. In many ways, the fledgling Green movement here reflects national trends, as well.

In the early 1990’s the Greens were a growing force with a strong core organized around opposition to a planned low-level radioactive waste dump backed by then-Governor, now-U.S. Senator George Voinovich. Though the nuclear dump was defeated, the Greens’ momentum for further political or social activism foundered on the rocks of political controversy. The group splintered over the 1996 election and what to do with Candidate Nader.