“The reason that Hobbes gives for supporting the State, namely that it is the only alternative to anarchy, is in the main a valid one.  A State may, however, be so bad that temporary anarchy seems preferable to its continuance, as in France in 1789 and in Russia in 1917.  Moreover the tendency of every government towards tyranny cannot be kept in check unless governments have some fear of rebellion.  Governments would be worse than they are if Hobbes’s submissive attitude were universally adopted by subjects.  This is true in the political sphere, where governments will try, if they can, to make themselves personally irremovable; it is true in the economic sphere, where they will try to enrich themselves and their friends at the public expense; it is true in the intellectual sphere, where they will suppress every new discovery or doctrine that seems to menace their power.  These are reasons for not thinking only of the risk of anarchy, but also of the danger of injustice and ossification that is bound up with omnipotence in government.”  (Russell, pg. 556)

            “As we saw, he [Spinoza] believes that hatred can be overcome by love:  “Hatred is increased by being reciprocated, and can on the other hand be destroyed by love.  Hatred which is completely vanquished by love, passes into love; and love is thereupon greater, than if hatred had not preceded it.”  I wish I could believe this, but I cannot, except in exceptional cases where the person hating is completely in the power of the person who refuses to hate in return.  In such cases, surprise at being not punished may have a reforming effect.  But so long as the wicked have power, it is not much use assuring them that you do not hate them, since they will attribute your words to the wrong motive.  And you cannot deprive them of power by non-resistance.”  (Russell, pg. 580)

     That said, I was pleased (and not a little astounded) to read this.  (H/T Uncle D)

     Great going, Capt Sullenberger! You handled a difficult emergency procedure well.  You know what they say, any landing you can walk away from. . . .

     Perhaps the new Sullenberger Corollary to that rule would be ". . . or the passengers and you can swim or boat away from. . ." is a good landing! The best part was walking up and down the aisles making certain everyone else was off safe. 

     Given the good outcome, I think it might actually have been fun to have been aboard (except I would have ended up losing my laptop as I egressed the plane).  Oh, well.  One can’t be everywhere.  I’ll have to settle for the one time I pointed out to some pilots that our small turboprop passenger plane’s cabin pressure wasn’t enabled. 

     Thanks to LifePundit for inspiring me to write this post!

20090119 Update:  I am remiss in not giving credit to the co-pilot, the flight attendants, and indeed to the passengers who by all accounts sounded like they remained pretty calm during the event.  The Captain may get most of the credit, but the Airbus is a crewed airplane, and whatever the crew did or did not do that helped the Captain land entitles them to an heroic part in this event as well.

     Here’s an academic take on the financial crisis.  This is 58:19 long, so grab a break and a cup of coffee if you mean to watch this! [Update - Sorry, for some reason embedding it did not work this time.]

     I also just ran across a new favorite quote by Brian Rogers, T. Rowe Price Chairman and Chief Investment Officer:  "Statistically speaking, the world does not end that often."   

     In case you were wondering, seventy-nine is 2008 minus 1929.   

Update 2 - Attempt 2 to embed is below:

     It may have been a little tougher going for her!

     If you get a chance, check out the National Archives website  [Hat tip to Cox & Forkum].  You can download images of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. 

    Here’s some good thinking to get your 2007 underway.