DUCK POND

SUGGESTION FOR A BLOGSPHERE EXPERIMENT July 29, 2004

The following could be just pretentious junk, and my worst effort yet. And the judgment is not one I can make at this time of night. Train journey dissertations are perhaps inherently dangerous, even when you arrive safely at the destination. Here goes. . .

Occasionally the ducks encamp enmasse to the shore, and the ponds seldom still waters permit reflection. That happy moment provides the opportunity to have some reflections on the blog posts and comments. The blogsphere has to be seen as a obviously and radically different context than other media. It provides the opportunity for cross links to other blogs and comments and with links to information stored in Google and the other search engines. I have tried, and will try to reference and cross reference postings, comments and sources, in an effort to increase the appreciation of the wider world beyond this spot in the blogsphere.

As others have I am sure observed, the blogsphere is an opportunity, yet to be disillusioned, to realize more fully the democratic faith. We can all participate, and the democratic presumption that each of us may have something at sometime of value to say, and that we have a responsibility to do so. More often than we would like, some of us are given to talking nonsense, and perhaps all of us will at sometime we wrong. Nonetheless, we should submit our actions and understandings to democratic scrutiny and be held accountable to our neighbours and peers. The stupid and the foolish and the vicious might then be stopped before they can be damaging and heedless suffering might be avoided, and moreover wisdom and intelligence might prevail. There is a tradition in the West, and in other cultural traditions as well, not least the Muslim courts of Medieval Spain, that truth is an open dialectic enquiry in which reason and evidence determine the case, if only provisionally. I can think,for example, of Abelard’s “Sic et Non” (Duckspeak alert: A book I have not read, of which I only know by reputation.)

My model of an good post, reflecting not in any way performance but the enculturation of the education process, is of a well written essay. There is an immediate line of demarcation between the able, and those of us who represent the incompetent, with no intent to devalue achievement. If we set the bar too high, myself and others will not reach the heights and be deemed irrelevant, thus our limited possibility is effectively denied, snuffed out between the larynx and the tongue, sounding suspiciously like the cry of a duck. Good writing, and in this case George Orwell, is I think, evidenced by close observation.

Sometimes the top of the head stuff works well because it sets off a vigorous and participative discussion, with comments flowing from all points of the compass. I see this is something to be encouraged and experimented with, and not simply because it is easy to write. Expertise might sometimes set up unnecessary barriers. Let me be clear, I want my surgeon who operates on me to very competent, and I do not want the butcher to have a go, if I have any choice, however successful he or she proves to be.

I want to lodge a post tomorrow, which is in the nature of an experiment, and that others might take up, which I now must lodge tomorrow to be titled: Australia, Canada and the American Alliance. As yet another train exercise, I have done a bit of brain storming comparing and contrasting Australia and Canada and their relationships to the United States. This is a subject that I thought that I did not know anything about, and that may well prove to be true. And yet, looking at some obvious contrasts between Australia and Canada, which despite differences in historical experience and geography, are similar in size of population, provides insight into the nature of the relationship to the US.

The American Alliance takes on the quality of a mindless mantra that cannot be questioned, so as to drive out alternative visions of what Australia’s constructive engagement in the World might be not least our necessary engagement with Asia and the Pacific.

The experiment is to invite others to do so of their own brain storming, and see what we come up with. This experiment can both fall flat and lie fallow. As I say it is a suggestion.

A NEW LOOK July 29, 2004

There is a new season at the Duckpond. Adding and subtracting syntax, regardless of reasons, which can be found here, is not something, a person should undertake on arriving home at 11pm. It has been a night for gross mistakes. I was completely at fault. It was not that I missed my train, as much as I failed to buy a weekly, with unforseen implications.

Then I lost the blessed plot completely. The pond shrunk to insignificance. However, I realized the ducks would return if reformated, I filled up the pond again, and put out the bread crumbs. It all seems to have worked.

I think you can comment now annonymously. If not Haloscan here I come.

My planned post will be held over.

THE PERSONAL AND THE POLITICAL July 27, 2004

The Duckpond is well hidden away from the general commerce of the information highway. This link is of particular interest to me. I found it serendipitously, as is becoming a habit on this blog from my digressions into duckspeak. People have operations all the time – and most of the time, I understand, they come out alive.

But I constantly wonder what would happen to people, as I did the other day, who are not able to reach into their pocket and pay $150 for vaccinations at the chemist, or on other occasions pay a similar amount for a consultants with a specialist. I am fortunate to be able to make these payments – but their is no certainty in my situation as well. I work on a casual job, with a limited time span, and without award payment conditions. For example, overtime means literally working longer hours.

When I could not point to symptoms, other than those I could report, so I knew there was something wrong, I was given a deep vein thrombosis scan, and told by some local general practitioners there was nothing wrong with me. In fact I was prescribed exercises. I was angry and frustrated. When I had definite symptoms, I called in at a medical centre on the way home where I saw a GP who examined me whose prognosis was that it was either the heart, liver or kidneys. Then I saw a cardiologist, who organized a series of blood tests, computerized tomography and bone marrow biopsis.

Even with expert reading of data there is no certainty that I have a lymphoma in the spleen. The analogy spins to mind of intelligence reporting. In fairness to the doctors, I may have traduced, cancers can be subtle and difficult to diagnose. However, I have to think, a blood test, simple to carry out, might have been considered.

COMMENTING, BLOGGING AND ANONYMITY July 24, 2004

Spasmodically, with my heart in my hand, and my spleen in the surgical out tray, I have dared to comment on other blogs. The most recent example was when I took a walk on the wild side, and quacked along the road to surfdom.

I may be in the running for a Lord Sedgewood award for irrelevance.

I am intending to do some research into this electorate, and hope to get pre-election polling. Should be interesting. I had a second foray into commenting today on Public Interest.

Having a blog, even one as unknown as this, means the end to anonmity. This is something to accept. Be that as it may. In my current job, I don’t write anything. To write minimally, and that in itself is a reasonable objective, requires, in my opinion, respect for a reader.

Then I have jumped on a learning curve, evident from the appearance of this blog so far, for even simple things such as creating links.

But in this case, at least, I have found that by posting myself, perhaps too impulsively, I am ready to make comments elsewhere with a view to stimulating conversation around those issues that are of great interest to me, and of which I am not necessarily well informed.

POLITICAL BIAS July 20, 2004

It will become evident that the Duckpond does not pretend to be a friend of the Howard government. It takes the view that the democratic process is more important than any particular government. It is not written by a person with any particular political or legal expertise. Rather it will seek to ask what is the role of the citizen and how might individual responsiblity, either by expressing views or acting collectively, make a positive difference.