Why Twenty-Somethings Aren’t Doomed to Be Poor (but Thirty-Somethings Might Be). By Jordan Weissmann. The Atlantic, March 15, 2013.
Younger Generations Lag Behind Parents in Wealth-Building. By Annie Lowery. New York Times, March 14, 2013.
Saturday, March 16, 2013
The New Unmarried Moms. By Kay Hymowitz et al.
The New Unmarried Moms. By Kay Hymowtiz, W. Bradford Wilcox, and Kelleen Kaye. Wall Street Journal, March 15, 2013. Also find it here.
The Decline of Marriage and the Rise of Unwed Mothers: An Economic Mystery. By Derek Thompson. The Atlantic, March 18, 2013.
The Decline of Marriage and the Rise of Unwed Mothers: An Economic Mystery. By Derek Thompson. The Atlantic, March 18, 2013.
The End of Growth Wouldn’t Be the End of Capitalism. By Noah Smith.
The End of Growth Wouldn’t Be the End of Capitalism. By Noah Smith. The Atlantic, February 21, 2013.
How to Fix America’s Wealth Inequality: Teach Americans to Be Cheap. By Noah Smith. The Atlantic, March 12, 2013.
Noahpinion.
How to Fix America’s Wealth Inequality: Teach Americans to Be Cheap. By Noah Smith. The Atlantic, March 12, 2013.
Noahpinion.
If a Palestinian State Were Established. By Khaled Abu Toameh.
The Palestinians: Ten Points the U.S. Needs to Consider. By Khaled Abu Toameh. Gatestone Institute, March 14, 2013.
Close the peace gap. By David M. Weinberg. Israel Hayom, March 13, 2013.
Close the peace gap. By David M. Weinberg. Israel Hayom, March 13, 2013.
Egypt’s Islamists Warn Giving Women Some Rights Could Destroy Society. By Michelle Nichols.
 |
|
A woman
on a bus watched a protest against sexual harassment in Cairo last month.
Advocates of women’s rights worry that things will get worse for women. Tara
Todras-Whitehill for The New York Times.
|
Egypt’s Islamists warn giving women some rights could destroy society. By Michelle Nichols. Reuters, March 14, 2013.
Muslim Brotherhood Statement Denouncing UN Women Declaration for Violating Sharia Principles. IkhwanWeb, March 14, 2013.
Muslim Brotherhood’s Statement on Women Stirs Liberals’ Fears. By David D. Kirkpatrick and Mayy El Sheikh. New York Times, March 14, 2013.
Obama Subsidizes Egyptian War on Women. By Jonathan S. Tobin. Commentary, March 15, 2013.
You Just Won’t Believe What Obama Is Subsidizing in Egypt. By Jeffrey Grossman. JG, Caesarea, March 18, 2013.
More on Egypt and Morsi here.
Jews Worldwide See an Ally in Pope Francis. By Lauren Markoe.
Jews worldwide see an ally in Pope Francis. By Lauren Markoe. Washington Post, March 13, 2013.
The Legacy of Faith. By Jonathan S. Tobin. Commentary, March 14, 2013.
The Legacy of Faith. By Jonathan S. Tobin. Commentary, March 14, 2013.
The Road to Republican Revival. By Jeb Bush.
The Road to Republican Revival. By Jeb Bush. Wall Street Journal, March 15, 2013.
Bush:
Today, the sad reality is that if you're born poor, if your parents didn’t go to college, if you don’t know your father, if English isn't spoken at home—then the odds are stacked against you. You are more likely to stay poor today than at any other time since World War II.
Conservatives have allowed liberals to channel the anger and frustration that comes from this oppressive dynamic to attack the very idea of success itself. In their view, anyone who has climbed to the top 1% has committed some form of gross social breach and deserves scorn. This is enormously shortsighted. In a fair capitalist system, financial success should be the byproduct of innovation and achievement.
The central mission of conservatives is to reignite social mobility in this country—restoring the right to rise.
Jeb Bush CPAC Speech Says GOP Must Stop Being “Anti Everything” Party. By Jon Ward. The Huffington Post, March 15, 2013.
Ward, with quotes from Bush CPAC speech:
Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush beseeched a gathering of conservatives in remarkably frank terms on Friday night to change the course of the Republican Party and to become a more diverse, welcoming and understanding party to minorities and low-income Americans.
Bush, speaking at the Conservative Political Action Conference annual dinner, made the heart of his speech a call to the GOP to “learn from past mistakes.” He made his case in some of the bluntest language he has used.
“All too often we’re associated with being ‘anti’ everything,” Bush said. “Way too many people believe Republicans are anti-immigrant, anti-woman, anti-science, anti-gay, anti-worker, and the list goes on and on and on. Many voters are simply unwilling to choose our candidates even though they share our core beliefs, because those voters feel unloved, unwanted and unwelcome in our party.”
And Bush also threw cold water in the face of conservatives who espouse a strict up-by-the-bootstraps doctrine of individual responsibility, and who ascribe failure only to personal failure. Life, he said, is increasingly more difficult for those who aren’t born with built-in advantages.
“It is not a validation of our conservative principles if we can only point to the increasingly rare individual who overcomes adversity and succeeds in America,” Bush said. “Here’s reality: if you’re fortunate enough to count yourself among the privileged, much of the rest of the nation is drowning.
“In our country today, if you’re born poor, if your parents didn’t go to college, if you don’t know your father, if English isn’t spoken at home, then the odds are stacked against you. You are more likely to stay poor today than at any other time since World War II,” he said.
Bush lamented that liberals have “channeled the anger and frustration that comes from this oppressive dynamic and used it as an opportunity to attack the very idea of success itself,” and argued that conservatism holds out the best path upward for those without power or means.
“Conservative principles, and not liberal dogma, best reflect the ideals that made this nation great,” he said.
But he faulted the GOP for not caring about large swaths of the country, and said if that attitude remains, the right will forfeit its ability to influence the nation.
“The face of the Republican Party needs to be the face of every American, and we need to be the party of inclusion and acceptance. It's our heritage and it's our future and we need to couch our efforts in those terms,” he said.
The only way to attract these new faces to the party, Bush said, is through building real, ongoing relationships with others over a long period of time.
“As Republicans, we need to get re-acquainted with the notion that the relationships that really matter are not made through Twitter and social media. Real relationships take time to grow, and they begin with a genuine interest in the stories, dreams and challenges harbored within each of us,” he said.
He took an implicit shot at 2012 GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney’s comments about the 47 percent he dismissed as wanting nothing but government benefits and handouts.
“Never again can the Republican Party simply write off entire segments of our society because we assume our principles have limited appeal. They have broad appeal,” he said.
The ballroom crowd applauded at this, but Bush’s demeanor throughout the speech was not demonstrative or electric, and the crowd's response was supportive, but low-key.
Jeb Bush Delivers Straight Talk to Republicans. By Beth Reinhard. National Journal, March 15, 2013.
Jeb Bush Says Republicans Often Seen as “Anti Everything.” By John McCormick. Bloomberg, March 15, 2013.
Can Jeb Bush Save the GOP and End Its Emerging Civil War? By John Avlon. The Daily Beast, March 5, 2013.
Jeb Bush Beats the Drum for Inclusion and Acceptance at CPAC. By J. Robert Smith. The American Thinker, March 16, 2013.
Smith:
Wasn’t Jeb Bush supposed to be the conservative Bush? Perhaps the former Sunshine State guv is still more to the right than his ex-prez dad and ex-prez bro, George H.W. and George W. Yet . . . yet . . . As reported by the Washington Times today, here’s the big take-away from Jeb’s speech to CPACers this past week:
Jeb, just what do you mean by “inclusion and acceptance?” In fairness, perhaps you laid that out after your speech. But if it means the same thing Karl Rove (the Architect of Establishment GOP Failure) and the other real inbred in DC’s GOP consultant class mean, then you’re talking about the party’s conservative base being more elastic in terms of principles. You’re talking about kinda bending on social issues and being more open to immigration reform (which is code for “What the hell, let the illegals – excuse me, the undocumented – stay and make them insta-citizens”).
Allowing for gay marriage, gay adoption . . . toning it down on abortion? Reference God and faith less so as not to offend the growing numbers of “secular” (godless) young voters?
Nuts to all that.
Now, if you mean putting more resources behind better outreach to segments of the Hispanic, black, and Asian communities where conservative principles and messaging will resonate, then we can have – what do they say these days? – a dialogue. But if all you’re serving up is that GOP Big Tent pabulum that’s got heaping portions of leftism mixed in it – no, no, siree. Dialogue ended.
In fact, Jeb, the GOP needs to tear a page out of Pope Francis’ book: Unyielding on the tenets of Catholicism but more than willing to initiate a new evangelicalism – a genuine outreach to share the practices and worth of principled faith. We know: For the jaded, principle isn’t what politics is about; it’s about winning, so administer a little flame to the plastic GOP and twist and stretch it to fit the sensibilities and worldview of today’s voters, who are more in line with Democrats – Democrats, who are just going a tad far in their policies and need the kindly, skillful, moderating hand of the Republican elite. Let’s have a tidier statism, shall we?
Fads and trends, they come and go faster than Super Bowl commercials. Principles – well, principles, if grounded in reality, if consistent with human nature, and if time-tested as successful, they endure. That sounds cockeyed by contemporary standards, eh? So be it.
Believe it or not, rock-solid principles will outlive Karl Rove, the grievously-erring and grasping left, confused voters, hip twenty- and thirty-somethings, disengaged low-information voters, eccentric mayors, and the bizarre, nihilistic artsy-fartsies. But, gosh, if principles and conservatives get in the way of winning elections . . . you know what Karl would say about that, right?
By the way, Romney’s remark about the “47 percent” was impolitic but said at a private fundraiser, not in open forum. What ol’ “Two-left-feet” Mitt didn’t count on was someone capturing his off-the-cuff remark on a handheld and broadcasting it to the world. Mitt’s sin was being a step or two behind the times – technologically-speaking.
Inclusion and acceptance – you betcha, Jebster. The real question: Are those cohorts that are worth courting willing to accept us three-eyed conservatives who ain’t selling our principles down the river – no-way, no-how – not for the fool’s gold of short term electoral gain (if that)?
For the nation’s sake, let’s hope so.
Jeb Bush’s CPAC speech no cure for Bush fatigue. Twitchy, March 15, 2013.
CPAC 2013: Jeb Bush Speaks at the Ronald Reagan Dinner. The ACU, March 16, 2013. YouTube. Also find it here and here.
Bush:
Today, the sad reality is that if you're born poor, if your parents didn’t go to college, if you don’t know your father, if English isn't spoken at home—then the odds are stacked against you. You are more likely to stay poor today than at any other time since World War II.
Conservatives have allowed liberals to channel the anger and frustration that comes from this oppressive dynamic to attack the very idea of success itself. In their view, anyone who has climbed to the top 1% has committed some form of gross social breach and deserves scorn. This is enormously shortsighted. In a fair capitalist system, financial success should be the byproduct of innovation and achievement.
The central mission of conservatives is to reignite social mobility in this country—restoring the right to rise.
Jeb Bush CPAC Speech Says GOP Must Stop Being “Anti Everything” Party. By Jon Ward. The Huffington Post, March 15, 2013.
Ward, with quotes from Bush CPAC speech:
Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush beseeched a gathering of conservatives in remarkably frank terms on Friday night to change the course of the Republican Party and to become a more diverse, welcoming and understanding party to minorities and low-income Americans.
Bush, speaking at the Conservative Political Action Conference annual dinner, made the heart of his speech a call to the GOP to “learn from past mistakes.” He made his case in some of the bluntest language he has used.
“All too often we’re associated with being ‘anti’ everything,” Bush said. “Way too many people believe Republicans are anti-immigrant, anti-woman, anti-science, anti-gay, anti-worker, and the list goes on and on and on. Many voters are simply unwilling to choose our candidates even though they share our core beliefs, because those voters feel unloved, unwanted and unwelcome in our party.”
And Bush also threw cold water in the face of conservatives who espouse a strict up-by-the-bootstraps doctrine of individual responsibility, and who ascribe failure only to personal failure. Life, he said, is increasingly more difficult for those who aren’t born with built-in advantages.
“It is not a validation of our conservative principles if we can only point to the increasingly rare individual who overcomes adversity and succeeds in America,” Bush said. “Here’s reality: if you’re fortunate enough to count yourself among the privileged, much of the rest of the nation is drowning.
“In our country today, if you’re born poor, if your parents didn’t go to college, if you don’t know your father, if English isn’t spoken at home, then the odds are stacked against you. You are more likely to stay poor today than at any other time since World War II,” he said.
Bush lamented that liberals have “channeled the anger and frustration that comes from this oppressive dynamic and used it as an opportunity to attack the very idea of success itself,” and argued that conservatism holds out the best path upward for those without power or means.
“Conservative principles, and not liberal dogma, best reflect the ideals that made this nation great,” he said.
But he faulted the GOP for not caring about large swaths of the country, and said if that attitude remains, the right will forfeit its ability to influence the nation.
“The face of the Republican Party needs to be the face of every American, and we need to be the party of inclusion and acceptance. It's our heritage and it's our future and we need to couch our efforts in those terms,” he said.
The only way to attract these new faces to the party, Bush said, is through building real, ongoing relationships with others over a long period of time.
“As Republicans, we need to get re-acquainted with the notion that the relationships that really matter are not made through Twitter and social media. Real relationships take time to grow, and they begin with a genuine interest in the stories, dreams and challenges harbored within each of us,” he said.
He took an implicit shot at 2012 GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney’s comments about the 47 percent he dismissed as wanting nothing but government benefits and handouts.
“Never again can the Republican Party simply write off entire segments of our society because we assume our principles have limited appeal. They have broad appeal,” he said.
The ballroom crowd applauded at this, but Bush’s demeanor throughout the speech was not demonstrative or electric, and the crowd's response was supportive, but low-key.
Jeb Bush Delivers Straight Talk to Republicans. By Beth Reinhard. National Journal, March 15, 2013.
Jeb Bush Says Republicans Often Seen as “Anti Everything.” By John McCormick. Bloomberg, March 15, 2013.
Can Jeb Bush Save the GOP and End Its Emerging Civil War? By John Avlon. The Daily Beast, March 5, 2013.
Jeb Bush Beats the Drum for Inclusion and Acceptance at CPAC. By J. Robert Smith. The American Thinker, March 16, 2013.
Smith:
Wasn’t Jeb Bush supposed to be the conservative Bush? Perhaps the former Sunshine State guv is still more to the right than his ex-prez dad and ex-prez bro, George H.W. and George W. Yet . . . yet . . . As reported by the Washington Times today, here’s the big take-away from Jeb’s speech to CPACers this past week:
Thanks much, Jebster. We need yet another Republican stalwart lecturing us inbred, three-eyed conservative yokels about the need for “inclusion and acceptance” in the GOP. Yes, siree, them Hills have eyes, and us DNA-flawed flyover country conservatives want to keep them Hispanics, black folk, and Asian people out of our hills. And if these strangers dare trod on our precious soil, why, we’ll plum BBQ and eat ’em!“I am here to tell you that there is no ‘us’ and ‘them,’” Mr. Bush said, in a thinly veiled jab at the “47” percent comments that GOP nominee Mitt Romney made on the 2012 campaign trail. “We need to be the party of inclusion and acceptance.”
Jeb, just what do you mean by “inclusion and acceptance?” In fairness, perhaps you laid that out after your speech. But if it means the same thing Karl Rove (the Architect of Establishment GOP Failure) and the other real inbred in DC’s GOP consultant class mean, then you’re talking about the party’s conservative base being more elastic in terms of principles. You’re talking about kinda bending on social issues and being more open to immigration reform (which is code for “What the hell, let the illegals – excuse me, the undocumented – stay and make them insta-citizens”).
Allowing for gay marriage, gay adoption . . . toning it down on abortion? Reference God and faith less so as not to offend the growing numbers of “secular” (godless) young voters?
Nuts to all that.
Now, if you mean putting more resources behind better outreach to segments of the Hispanic, black, and Asian communities where conservative principles and messaging will resonate, then we can have – what do they say these days? – a dialogue. But if all you’re serving up is that GOP Big Tent pabulum that’s got heaping portions of leftism mixed in it – no, no, siree. Dialogue ended.
In fact, Jeb, the GOP needs to tear a page out of Pope Francis’ book: Unyielding on the tenets of Catholicism but more than willing to initiate a new evangelicalism – a genuine outreach to share the practices and worth of principled faith. We know: For the jaded, principle isn’t what politics is about; it’s about winning, so administer a little flame to the plastic GOP and twist and stretch it to fit the sensibilities and worldview of today’s voters, who are more in line with Democrats – Democrats, who are just going a tad far in their policies and need the kindly, skillful, moderating hand of the Republican elite. Let’s have a tidier statism, shall we?
Fads and trends, they come and go faster than Super Bowl commercials. Principles – well, principles, if grounded in reality, if consistent with human nature, and if time-tested as successful, they endure. That sounds cockeyed by contemporary standards, eh? So be it.
Believe it or not, rock-solid principles will outlive Karl Rove, the grievously-erring and grasping left, confused voters, hip twenty- and thirty-somethings, disengaged low-information voters, eccentric mayors, and the bizarre, nihilistic artsy-fartsies. But, gosh, if principles and conservatives get in the way of winning elections . . . you know what Karl would say about that, right?
By the way, Romney’s remark about the “47 percent” was impolitic but said at a private fundraiser, not in open forum. What ol’ “Two-left-feet” Mitt didn’t count on was someone capturing his off-the-cuff remark on a handheld and broadcasting it to the world. Mitt’s sin was being a step or two behind the times – technologically-speaking.
Inclusion and acceptance – you betcha, Jebster. The real question: Are those cohorts that are worth courting willing to accept us three-eyed conservatives who ain’t selling our principles down the river – no-way, no-how – not for the fool’s gold of short term electoral gain (if that)?
For the nation’s sake, let’s hope so.
Jeb Bush’s CPAC speech no cure for Bush fatigue. Twitchy, March 15, 2013.
CPAC 2013: Jeb Bush Speaks at the Ronald Reagan Dinner. The ACU, March 16, 2013. YouTube. Also find it here and here.
Policing Moral Boundaries. By Peter Berger.
Policing Moral Boundaries. By Peter Berger. The American Interest, March 13, 2013.
Detroit Dems Enrich Wall Street As City Goes Bust. By Walter Russell Mead.
Detroit Dems Enrich Wall Street As City Goes Bust. By Walter Russell Mead. Via Meadia, March 15, 2013.
The Obama Administration Must Find a Way to Work With Morsi. By James Traub.
Lost in the Desert. By James Traub. Foreign Policy, March 15, 2013.
Americans’ Dislike for Egypt Increases to Twenty-Year High. By Walter Russell Mead. Via Meadia, March 15, 2013.
More on Morsi and Egypt here.
Americans’ Dislike for Egypt Increases to Twenty-Year High. By Walter Russell Mead. Via Meadia, March 15, 2013.
More on Morsi and Egypt here.
America’s March Madness Problem. By Marc Lynch.
America’s March Madness Problem. By Marc Lynch. Foreign Policy, March 14, 2013.
Will Obama Finally Crack the Israeli Code? By Jeffrey Goldberg.
Will Obama Finally Crack the Israeli Code? By Jeffrey Goldberg. Bloomberg, March 14, 2013.
Uzi Arad: It behooves allies to listen to each other. By Herb Keinon. Jerusalem Post, March 14, 2013.
Uzi Arad: It behooves allies to listen to each other. By Herb Keinon. Jerusalem Post, March 14, 2013.
Secularism, the Arab Ways. By Issandr El Amrani.
Secularism, the Arab Ways. By Issandr El Amrani. New York Times, March 13, 2013.
Free Arabs: Democracy, Secularism, Fun.
Free Arabs: Democracy, Secularism, Fun.
Friday, March 15, 2013
Ultra-Orthodox Big Losers in New Israeli Coalition. By Jonathan S. Tobin.
Ultra-Orthodox Big Losers in New Coalition. By Jonathan S. Tobin. Commentary, March 13, 2013.
MOOCs and Historical Research. By John McNeill.
MOOCs and Historical Research. By John McNeill. Perspectives on History, Vol. 51, No. 3 (March 2013). Also find it here.
History à la MOOC. By Jeremy Adelman. Perspectives on History, Vol. 51, No. 3 (March 2013). Also find it here.
The Professors’ Big Stage. By Thomas L. Friedman. New York Times, March 5, 2013.
The End of the University as We Know It. By Nathan Harden. The American Interest, January/February 2013.
History à la MOOC. By Jeremy Adelman. Perspectives on History, Vol. 51, No. 3 (March 2013). Also find it here.
The Professors’ Big Stage. By Thomas L. Friedman. New York Times, March 5, 2013.
The End of the University as We Know It. By Nathan Harden. The American Interest, January/February 2013.
Neanderthals Doomed by Vision-Centered Brains.
Neanderthals Doomed by Vision-Centered Brains. By Tia Ghose. LiveScience, March 12, 2013. Also at Yahoo News, The Huffington Post.
New insights into differences in brain organization between Neanderthals and anatomically modern humans. By Eiluned Pearce, Chris Stringer, and R. I. M. Dunbar. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, Vol. 280, No. 1758 (May 7, 2013), published online March 13, 2013. PDF. Also find it here.
Neanderthals’ large eyes “caused their demise.” By Pallab Ghosh. BBC News, March 12, 2013. Chris Stringer video here.
Return of the Neanderthals. By Virginia Hughes. National Geographic News, March 6, 2013.
Neanderthal attitude to socializing may have caused downfall. AFP. The Sydney Morning Herald, March 14, 2013.
Bright Eyes. By Clive Finlayson. Clive Finlayson’s Human Evolution Blog, June 14, 2013.
Neanderthal brains focussed on vision and movement leaving less room for social networking. The Royal Society, March 13, 2013.
Royal Society News Release:
Although Neanderthals’ brains were similar in size to their contemporary modern human counterparts, fresh analysis of fossil data suggests that their brain structure was rather different. Results imply that larger areas of the Neanderthal brain, compared to the modern human brain, were given over to vision and movement and this left less room for the higher level thinking required to form large social groups.
Professor Robin Dunbar and Eiluned Pearce at the University of Oxford and Professor Chris Stringer FRS at the Natural History Museum looked at data from 27,000–75,000-year-old fossils, mostly from Europe and the Near East. They compared the skulls of 32 anatomically modern humans and 13 Neanderthals to examine brain size and organisation. In a subset of these fossils, they found that Neanderthals had significantly larger eye sockets, and therefore eyes, than modern humans.
The researchers calculated the standard size of fossil brains for body mass and visual processing requirements. Once the differences in body and visual system size are taken into account, the researchers were able to compare how much of the brain was left over for other cognitive functions.
Previous research by Dunbar and Pearce shows that modern humans living at higher latitudes evolved bigger vision areas in the brain to cope with the low light levels. This latest study builds on that research, suggesting that Neanderthals probably had larger eyes than contemporary humans because they evolved in Europe, whereas contemporary humans had only recently emerged from lower latitude Africa.
“Since Neanderthals evolved at higher latitudes and also have bigger bodies than modern humans, more of the Neanderthal brain would have been dedicated to vision and body control, leaving less brain to deal with other functions like social networking,” explains lead author Eiluned Pearce, anthropologist at the University of Oxford.
“Smaller social groups might have made Neanderthals less able to cope with the difficulties of their harsh Eurasian environments because they would have had fewer friends to help them out in times of need. Overall, differences in brain organisation and social cognition may go a long way towards explaining why Neanderthals went extinct whereas modern humans survived.”
“The large brains of Neanderthals have been a source of debate from the time of the first fossil discoveries of this group, but getting any real idea of the ‘quality’ of their brains has been very problematic,” says Professor Chris Stringer FRS, Research Leader in Human Origins at the Natural History Museum and co-author on the paper. “Hence discussion has centred on their material culture and supposed way of life as indirect signs of the level of complexity of their brains in comparison with ours.
“Our study provides a more direct approach by estimating how much of their brain was allocated to cognitive functions, including the regulation of social group size; a smaller size for the latter would have had implications for their level of social complexity and their ability to create, conserve and build on innovations.”
Professor Robin Dunbar observes: “Having less brain available to manage the social world has profound implications for the Neanderthals’ ability to maintain extended trading networks, and are likely also to have resulted in less well developed material culture – which, between them, may have left them more exposed than modern humans when facing the ecological challenges of the Ice Ages.”
The relationship between absolute brain size and higher cognitive abilities has long been controversial, and this new study could explain why despite similar brain size, Neanderthal culture appears less developed than that of early modern humans, for example in relation to symbolism, ornamentation and art.
New insights into differences in brain organization between Neanderthals and anatomically modern humans. By Eiluned Pearce, Chris Stringer, and R. I. M. Dunbar. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, Vol. 280, No. 1758 (May 7, 2013), published online March 13, 2013. PDF. Also find it here.
Neanderthals’ large eyes “caused their demise.” By Pallab Ghosh. BBC News, March 12, 2013. Chris Stringer video here.
Return of the Neanderthals. By Virginia Hughes. National Geographic News, March 6, 2013.
Neanderthal attitude to socializing may have caused downfall. AFP. The Sydney Morning Herald, March 14, 2013.
Bright Eyes. By Clive Finlayson. Clive Finlayson’s Human Evolution Blog, June 14, 2013.
Neanderthal brains focussed on vision and movement leaving less room for social networking. The Royal Society, March 13, 2013.
Royal Society News Release:
Although Neanderthals’ brains were similar in size to their contemporary modern human counterparts, fresh analysis of fossil data suggests that their brain structure was rather different. Results imply that larger areas of the Neanderthal brain, compared to the modern human brain, were given over to vision and movement and this left less room for the higher level thinking required to form large social groups.
Professor Robin Dunbar and Eiluned Pearce at the University of Oxford and Professor Chris Stringer FRS at the Natural History Museum looked at data from 27,000–75,000-year-old fossils, mostly from Europe and the Near East. They compared the skulls of 32 anatomically modern humans and 13 Neanderthals to examine brain size and organisation. In a subset of these fossils, they found that Neanderthals had significantly larger eye sockets, and therefore eyes, than modern humans.
The researchers calculated the standard size of fossil brains for body mass and visual processing requirements. Once the differences in body and visual system size are taken into account, the researchers were able to compare how much of the brain was left over for other cognitive functions.
Previous research by Dunbar and Pearce shows that modern humans living at higher latitudes evolved bigger vision areas in the brain to cope with the low light levels. This latest study builds on that research, suggesting that Neanderthals probably had larger eyes than contemporary humans because they evolved in Europe, whereas contemporary humans had only recently emerged from lower latitude Africa.
“Since Neanderthals evolved at higher latitudes and also have bigger bodies than modern humans, more of the Neanderthal brain would have been dedicated to vision and body control, leaving less brain to deal with other functions like social networking,” explains lead author Eiluned Pearce, anthropologist at the University of Oxford.
“Smaller social groups might have made Neanderthals less able to cope with the difficulties of their harsh Eurasian environments because they would have had fewer friends to help them out in times of need. Overall, differences in brain organisation and social cognition may go a long way towards explaining why Neanderthals went extinct whereas modern humans survived.”
“The large brains of Neanderthals have been a source of debate from the time of the first fossil discoveries of this group, but getting any real idea of the ‘quality’ of their brains has been very problematic,” says Professor Chris Stringer FRS, Research Leader in Human Origins at the Natural History Museum and co-author on the paper. “Hence discussion has centred on their material culture and supposed way of life as indirect signs of the level of complexity of their brains in comparison with ours.
“Our study provides a more direct approach by estimating how much of their brain was allocated to cognitive functions, including the regulation of social group size; a smaller size for the latter would have had implications for their level of social complexity and their ability to create, conserve and build on innovations.”
Professor Robin Dunbar observes: “Having less brain available to manage the social world has profound implications for the Neanderthals’ ability to maintain extended trading networks, and are likely also to have resulted in less well developed material culture – which, between them, may have left them more exposed than modern humans when facing the ecological challenges of the Ice Ages.”
The relationship between absolute brain size and higher cognitive abilities has long been controversial, and this new study could explain why despite similar brain size, Neanderthal culture appears less developed than that of early modern humans, for example in relation to symbolism, ornamentation and art.
 |
| Reconstruction of a Neanderthal woman. Joe McNally/National Geographic. |
Allen West’s Speech at CPAC 2013.
CPAC 2013: Lt. Col. Allen West. The ACU, March 14, 2013. YouTube. Also at The Right Scoop, Fox News.
Allen West at CPAC: “Deeds, Not Words, Will Paint This Country Red.” By John Hayward. Human Events, March 14, 2013.
Who Speaks for the GOP Base? By Jonathan S. Tobin. Commentary, March 14, 2013.
CPAC 2013: US Senator Tim Scott. The ACU, March 14, 2013. YouTube.
CPAC 2013 Playlist. The ACU. YouTube.
Allen West at CPAC: “Deeds, Not Words, Will Paint This Country Red.” By John Hayward. Human Events, March 14, 2013.
Who Speaks for the GOP Base? By Jonathan S. Tobin. Commentary, March 14, 2013.
CPAC 2013: US Senator Tim Scott. The ACU, March 14, 2013. YouTube.
CPAC 2013 Playlist. The ACU. YouTube.
Thursday, March 14, 2013
The Obstacles to a Republican Revival. By Matthew Continetti.
The Double Bind. By Matthew Continetti. The Weekly Standard, March 18, 2013. Also find it here.
What stands in the way of Republican revival? Republicans.
The Republican Path Ahead. By Peter Wehner. Commentary, March 1, 2013.
What stands in the way of Republican revival? Republicans.
The Republican Path Ahead. By Peter Wehner. Commentary, March 1, 2013.
The Conclave’s Canny Choice. By Walter Russell Mead.
The Conclave’s Canny Choice. By Walter Russell Mead. Via Meadia, March 14, 2013.
Childhood Under Fire in Syria.
 |
| A refugee camp on the Syrian border. |
Two Million Syrian Children Caught in Crossfire of Conflict Entering its Third Year, Save the Children Warns. By Francine Uenuma. Save the Children, March 13, 2013.
Childhood Under Fire: The impact of two years of conflict in Syria. Save the Children, March 2013.
Two Years Later: What the Syrian War Looks Like. By Rania Abouzeid. The New Yorker, March 14, 2013.
Drive-Bys Shocked to Learn Pope Francis is Catholic. By Rush Limbaugh.
Drive-Bys Shocked to Learn Pope Francis is Catholic. By Rush Limbaugh. RushLimbaugh.com, March 14, 2013.
Statists Must Wipe Out Religion and Instill Blind Faith in Government. By Rush Limbaugh. RushLimbaugh.com, March 14, 2013.
The U.S. Media Just Can’t Understand the Vatican. By Jim Geraghty. National Review Online, March 14, 2013.
Limbaugh: “Pope Francis Is Bad News For The Drive-By Media.” Audio. Daily Rushbo, March 14, 2013. YouTube.
Statists Must Wipe Out Religion and Instill Blind Faith in Government. By Rush Limbaugh. RushLimbaugh.com, March 14, 2013.
The U.S. Media Just Can’t Understand the Vatican. By Jim Geraghty. National Review Online, March 14, 2013.
Limbaugh: “Pope Francis Is Bad News For The Drive-By Media.” Audio. Daily Rushbo, March 14, 2013. YouTube.
The Myth of the Jewish Exile from the Land of Israel. By Israel J. Yuval.
The Myth of the Jewish Exile from the Land of Israel: A Demonstration of Irenic Scholarship. By Israel J. Yuval. Common Knowledge, Vol. 12, No. 1 (Winter 2006).
No, Rivkele, The Jews Weren’t Driven into Exile by the Romans. By Jerry Haber. The Magnes Zionist, July 29, 2007.
No, Rivkele, The Jews Weren’t Driven into Exile by the Romans. By Jerry Haber. The Magnes Zionist, July 29, 2007.
Israel’s Shas Party’s Anti-Russian Election Ad: A True Jew Won’t Kiss a Russian Shikseh.
Shas Ad: A True Jew Won’t Kiss a Russian Shikseh. By Jerry Haber. The Magnes Zionist, January 9, 2013.
Shas election ads: Using Jewish conversion for incitement. By Yair Ettinger. Haaretz, January 9, 2013.
Shas to shelve controversial “conversion star” campaign ad. By Jonathan Lis. Haaretz, January 9, 2013.
Converting Israel’s conversion law. By Roni Abramson. Haaretz, January 13, 2013.
Shas election ads: Using Jewish conversion for incitement. By Yair Ettinger. Haaretz, January 9, 2013.
Shas to shelve controversial “conversion star” campaign ad. By Jonathan Lis. Haaretz, January 9, 2013.
Converting Israel’s conversion law. By Roni Abramson. Haaretz, January 13, 2013.
Hamas’s Disenchantment With Morsi. By Hussein Ibish.
 |
|
Palestinian
girls walk in front of a photograph of Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi
shaking hands with the Palestinian Hamas leader Ismail Haniya, in Gaza City on
August 29, 2012. (Mohammed Abed / AFP / GettyImages). |
Hamas’s Desengaño With Morsi. By Hussein Ibish. The Daily Beast, March 11, 2013.
More on Egypt and Morsi here.
Ibish:
English has by far the largest vocabulary of any language, but there are still times when we have to look beyond its confines to convey a particular meaning. There is a Spanish word, desengaño, which connotes a combination of disappointment, disenchantment, disillusionment and despair, for which we have no precise English equivalent. And this, surely, best sums up the current attitude of the Hamas rulers in Gaza towards Egypt’s new government.
Many Hamas leaders were apparently convinced that the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and elsewhere would mean a radical transformation of its fortunes and hold the key to its eventual victory over secular nationalists for control of the Palestinian national movement. At a minimum, they expected the new government of President Mohammed Morsi would adopt a much friendlier foreign policy, ease the blockade, pressure Israel and provide Hamas with a steady stream of support.
As the months have dragged on, it's become clear that this not only isn’t the case, but that the Morsi government is at least as problematic from Hamas’s perspective as its much-hated Mubarak predecessor. The recent flooding of Gaza smuggling tunnels by the Egyptian military with raw sewage (in contrast to Mubarak’s occasional use of tear gas), pursuant to an Egyptian court order to close all such tunnels, is only the last straw.
Egypt has moved to stop the transfer of all goods, including huge shipments of fuel, through the tunnels and has again closed the Rafah border crossing. The Egyptian side of the blockade has never been so intense. These actions have had a devastating effect on the Gaza economy. They have brought reconstruction efforts almost to a halt, and sent the price of cement and building materials soaring. And they are costing both Hamas and Gaza businesses at least hundreds of millions of dollars, if not more, in lost revenues.
Moreover, Egypt reportedly recently refused to allow Hamas to establish a formal office in Cairo. Even more insultingly, Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood officials reportedly urged Hamas to abandon “armed struggle” against Israel and follow their example and “implement jihad in other ways.” Hamas, of course, denies these reports, but they scan perfectly with all other available information and political logic.
Several Hamas leaders in Gaza have erupted in anger in recent days, in spite of obvious efforts for many weeks to contain their rage and express “understanding” of Egypt’s predicament. Senior Hamas leader Mahmoud Al-Zahar expressed the group’s growing infuriation by declaring, “The previous [Egyptian] regime was cruel, but it never allowed Gaza to starve.” Yet Hamas leaders, including Al-Zahar, continue to pin their hopes on an eventual transformation of the Egyptian policy and, in spite of everything, pledge undying support for Morsi.
After all, what other choice do they really have? From a practical point of view, the answer is to increase trade with Israel, and Israeli-permitted exports to Europe and elsewhere. And, to their considerable chagrin and embarrassment, this is exactly what Hamas leaders have been doing, insofar as the Israelis have allowed it. As The Economist noted, this “makes Hamas more dependent on—and subservient to—Israel, to ensure vital supplies continue,” as opposed to what they expected to be their new major partner and, indeed, salvation: the Muslim Brotherhood government in Cairo.
No doubt from a purely ideological and theoretical perspective, the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt is more sympathetic to Hamas at every level than the Mubarak regime had been. But there are ample reasons why a number of Israeli analysts recently argued, as I also have several times in the past, that Egypt's foreign policy hasn’t actually changed even if its official rhetoric has shifted somewhat.
First, while the ideology of Egypt’s presidency may have changed, its interests, challenges and options have not. Morsi may wish he lived in a different world, or inherited a different country from Mubarak, but he hasn’t. Egypt is still Egypt, Egyptians still Egyptians, and their interests will always come first for them. Among other things, Egypt has a vested interest in not being sucked back into control of, and responsibility for, Gaza. And it has a mutually advantageous peace treaty with Israel that no rational government is going to gamble with.
Second, Egypt’s national security policy remains both de facto and de jure in the hands of the military, which does not share the president’s ideology. So even if Morsi were inclined to intervene on behalf of Hamas at the expense of Egyptian interests, the military would almost certainly prevent this. As an Army spokesperson rather gently explained, “We realize how much our brothers in Palestine suffer, but that doesn’t mean that the Egyptian Armed Forces will allow anyone to harm national interests.”
Third, Egypt has a massive national security crisis in the Sinai Peninsula, particularly in the regions bordering Gaza. There, political extremists, terrorists, bandits and others run rampant, killing Egyptian soldiers, attacking the gas pipeline to Israel and disrupting almost all Egyptian government activities in the area. This is not only a national security issue for the military. It is a grave political challenge for Morsi, who cannot be seen as a president who is incapable of securing strategically vital areas of his own country.
It must be understood that smuggling tunnels from Egypt to Gaza run in both directions. There is a symbiotic and cooperative relationship between Hamas and other militant groups in Gaza and those in Sinai. Therefore there is no reason to suspect that Morsi is inclined to restrain the Egyptian military, despite any abstract ideological affinities towards Hamas.
For these reasons, and more, there’s no reason to expect that Egypt’s basic stance towards Hamas, Gaza, Israel or the rest of the region is likely to undergo any major transformation in the foreseeable future. Rhetoric on both sides notwithstanding, relations between Egypt and Gaza have become in every meaningful sense worse under Morsi than they were under Mubarak. As an Islamist, Morsi can more easily claim to his public that he’s acting in the essential national interest, perhaps even contrary to his own inclinations, and imply that it’s really the military that’s to blame.
As for Hamas, all they are left with is collapsing popularity, a retreat into increased reactionary social repression and misogyny to play to their core base and bolster their Islamist credentials, and the increasingly threadbare fantasy that Islamist rule in Cairo and elsewhere will save Gaza and deliver control of the broader Palestinian national movement to its de facto rulers.
Toxic Masculinity. By Jaclyn Friedman.
Toxic Masculinity. By Jaclyn Friedman. The American Prospect, March 13, 2013.
Steubenville and Challenging Rape Culture in Sports. By Dave Zirin. The Nation, March 13, 2013.
Steubenville and Challenging Rape Culture in Sports. By Dave Zirin. The Nation, March 13, 2013.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)