February 25, 2003
Bob Perelman: Against Shock and Awe

[Bob's revised the poem, and it has appeared in the Philadelphia Inquirer since first appearing here on Circulars.]

              We may not have chosen to live inside Dick Cheney's mind, but we do.
              Wyoming, I read somewhere, is the safest place in North America.
              No tornados, no tsunamis, no earthquakes, no monsoons, or floods. No major airport: no big planes crashing in the sleet.
              But if living in Wyoming is so safe, living inside Dick Cheney's mind, though it was formed there, is not safe at all.
              How do you get from Wyoming to Shock and Awe?
              Getting from Love to Hate, that's easy: Love, Live, Give, Gave, Gate, Hate.
              Love comes before life, and since newborns don't survive on their own, life at the beginning involves giving. It has to: breast milk, protection, language, diapers made out of whatever, some sort of attention before you crawl or walk. Everyone living was given some of that somehow.
              That gets us up to Give. Gave comes next because giving is tiring. You give and give and what thanks do you get? Nothing. Or worse. They think they're entitled; they're madder than ever; they sulk in their rooms, they throw rocks.
              So much for giving. The next logical step is to build a gate.
              But gates creak at night, they leak, they break, in fact, gates concentrate whatever's on either side, they distill hate.
              Love, Live, Give, Gave, Gate, Hate: Q.E.D.

              But getting from Wyoming to Shock and Awe?
              "Shock and Awe"? That's the Pentagon's current battle plan for Iraq: 300 to 400 cruise missiles the 1st day (more than in all of Desert Storm), 300 to 400 the next, to demolish water, electricity, communications, buildings, roads, bridges, infrastructure in general. "The sheer size of this has never been seen before," a Pentagon official told CBS. "There will not be a safe place in Baghdad." Harlan Ullman drew a parallel to Hiroshima: the Iraqi people will be "physically, emotionally and psychologically exhausted"; it will be "like the nuclear weapons at Hiroshima, not taking days or weeks but minutes." The point is "to impose [an] overwhelming level of Shock and Awe, to seize control of the environment and paralyze or so overload an adversary's perceptions and understanding of events that the enemy would be incapable of resistance."
              This is Shock and Awe, remember, not Wyoming.
              But it gets hard to tell them apart: overwhelming levels seizing control, paralyzing perceptions and understanding.
              That works for Wyoming and just about anywhere in the United States.
              That's the problem with living inside Dick Cheney's mind, whether we've chosen to or not.

              What's the point of Shock and Awe?
              To free the Iraqi people.
              Problem: "No safe place in Baghdad" contradicts "To free the Iraqi people."
              Rationale: Since the Iraqi people are enslaved inside Saddam Hussein's mind that mind must be destroyed. That means destroying Saddam Hussein's body, which means brushing aside Baghdad to find him to free the Iraqi people trapped inside his mind.
              But dead people are only free in the most limited way. Not much bang for the buck there.
              Deeper rationale: It's an adult world. Shock and Awe is adult political theater for a world audience. To reach an audience that big you have to project. That's the point of Shock, the sheer size of which has never, etc. Otherwise the audience won't be struck with Awe.
              What's the point of Awe?
              Awe kills two birds with one stone. For the right Arabs, it inaugurates democracy, or something, somehow. For the wrong Arabs, Awe will . . . what? Awe will awe them into submission.
              I can hear Dick Cheney arguing that Awe worked at Hiroshima.
              But Japan was at war with us, and Awe, or at least Instant Submission, didn't work outside Japan. The Iraqi people are not only not at war with us, we're rescuing them from Saddam Hussein's mind. And as for working outside Baghdad? Destroying it will awe al-Qaeda? That's a stretch. There are more al-Qaedans in London or Berlin than in Baghdad. Maybe we should get Berlin first.
              No matter how big you make Shock, you can't get to Awe.

              Forget it: We'll never know the exact route from Wyoming to Shock and Awe.
              But Shock and Awe is already halfway here: Here, Baghdad and Here, Wyoming. We're half "physically, emotionally and psychologically exhausted"; our "perceptions and understanding" are half "overloaded."
              But even half a mind is enough to do the math: We're half capable of resistance.
              The shocks are gigantic, disgusting, but at least they're not shocking, once we give up our imaginary safety.
              The other half, Awe with its ersatz religious capital letter, we can resist.
              The weapons are huge and thoughtless, but they don't deserve a shred of awe.
              A small victory, but it's one weapon destroyed, the one they always use first.

[The Shock and Awe language comes from web sites found on Google under "Shock and Awe."]

Posted by Brian Stefans at February 25, 2003 10:55 AM
Comments

This back and forth is an important concept to understand in C programming, especially on the Mac's RISC architecture. Almost every variable you work with can be represented in 32 bits of memory: thirty-two 1s and 0s define the data that a simple variable can hold. There are exceptions, like on the new 64-bit G5s and in the 128-bit world of AltiVec

Posted by: Matilda on January 19, 2004 01:15 AM

Note the new asterisks whenever we reference favoriteNumber, except for that new line right before the return.

Posted by: Grace on January 19, 2004 01:16 AM

That gives us a pretty good starting point to understand a lot more about variables, and that's what we'll be examining next lesson. Those new variable types I promised last lesson will finally make an appearance, and we'll examine a few concepts that we'll use to organize our data into more meaningful structures, a sort of precursor to the objects that Cocoa works with. And we'll delve a little bit more into the fun things we can do by looking at those ever-present bits in a few new ways.

Posted by: Edward on January 19, 2004 01:16 AM

When the machine compiles your code, however, it does a little bit of translation. At run time, the computer sees nothing but 1s and 0s, which is all the computer ever sees: a continuous string of binary numbers that it can interpret in various ways.

Posted by: Digory on January 19, 2004 01:16 AM

This variable is then used in various lines of code, holding values given it by variable assignments along the way. In the course of its life, a variable can hold any number of variables and be used in any number of different ways. This flexibility is built on the precept we just learned: a variable is really just a block of bits, and those bits can hold whatever data the program needs to remember. They can hold enough data to remember an integer from as low as -2,147,483,647 up to 2,147,483,647 (one less than plus or minus 2^31). They can remember one character of writing. They can keep a decimal number with a huge amount of precision and a giant range. They can hold a time accurate to the second in a range of centuries. A few bits is not to be scoffed at.

Posted by: Eliza on January 19, 2004 01:17 AM
-->