The Birth of a New Blog


Conundrum: This blog is supposed to be about Germany in general, and it's not supposed to be very political. A little political, but not very.

Yet lately, the German immigration crisis has generated so much fascinating controversy that, like a crow toying with a bright, shiny object, I can't seem to let go. The immigration posts are taking over this blog, but the subject is so momentous that I feel obliged -- nay, compelled! -- to keep posting about it. 

Solution? I'm going to split off immigration posts into a brand-new blog called "How Many? Which Ones? The German Immigration Blog" (h/t Ralph for the first part of the title).

Stay tuned here for announcements and links.

A Note About Sources

Many of you have complained about the fact that I sometimes link to right-wing websites such as Gates of Vienna or Politically Incorrect news. Sometimes I link to left-wing websites. Sometimes I link to cute cat videos. Sometimes I link to flatworm-eating contests in Nagorno-Karabakh.

Let me make clear that I know that these websites are nativist anti-immigrant sites. I have excellent Google-Fu, and can spot political bias a mile away. When I put a link in a post without comment, the purpose is solely to point you to information that confirms what I said in my text. The purpose of the link is not to endorse every single article, picture, and comment on that site. The purpose of the link, I repeat, is solely to point you to information. If the link I cite to has a political bias, I am aware of that fact already. I do not need to be told. Also, I do this blog in my spare time. I will cite to the first website that provides information to back up my claim. I will not waste minutes or hours until I finally get to an ideologically 'non-objectionable' website, if such a thing exists.

If you can direct me to information that disproves what I put in the link, then I would love to hear about that. If you simply don't like the political tendency of the source I linked to, but cannot disprove the facts reported there, I don't care.

I am also aware that Steve Sailer recently excerpted one of my posts about Merkel's Millions. I read Sailer regularly. I do not agree with all of his political positions, and I'm sure he doesn't agree with all of mine. But he's a punchy writer with an original perspective who actually does often highlight important information the mainstream media ignores. If you don't agree, read more of his posts. For every one that has you seething with outrage there will be another that will have you, perhaps grudgingly, saying 'the man does have a point'.

To sum up: if your comment consists of nothing more than clutching your pearls, dropping onto the fainting couch, and exclaiming: "How could you have cited that site?!?", you might as well save the effort.

German Joys Comment Policy

The comment policy on this blog is, in the words of Potter Stewart talking about pornography, "I know it when I see it."

If a comment makes any sort of argument, from whatever perspective, that's fine.

If it contains anything that I think might be illegal under German law (Holocaust denial, legally actionable libel and insults, endorsement of violent crimes), then I'll remove it. Not necessarily because I endorse that approach, but because I live in Germany and try to follow the local rules. Plus, I don't want to get sued. So far, almost nothing like that has ever showed up here, so I'm not that concerned.

I will also remove a comment if it fills me with despair for the future of the human race. You know, something like this. That hasn't ever happened so far. 

Needless to say, the views expressed in comments are solely those of the commenters. The fact that I have not removed a comment does not imply endorsement.

That's about it.

A Shout-Out to My Readers and Commenters

I'm not a sentimental man, but I'd just like to take a minute to thank all the readers and commenters of this blog. According to Typepad, that extremely fickle mistress (lookin' at you, MM), these are the stats so far, and the recent trend:



As you can see, the ratio of posts to comments is 1 to 3. The comments are the life-blood of this blog. The difference between screaming in a padded room and having a pleasant conversation over mimosas. And unlike so many bloggers, I have never had to disable, remove, or screen comments, except to prevent spam. No matter what the language, the discussion in comments is always civilized, even when you're tearing me -- or another commenter --a new asshole.

And ohne Scheiß, as they say in Cologne, I've learned an incredible amount from the comments to this blog. Just today, I learned how to download classical concerts from Youtube in good sound quality. That's just the tip of the iceberg. I've even used stuff from the comments in my boring academic publications. Don't expect a cut of the profits (currently € 0.00) though.

I don't have to tell you to keep it up. I know you will, and I'm counting on it.

In Defense of 'Serial', a Brilliant Podcast about the Epistemology of Investigation

If you haven't been following 'Serial', the podast from Chicago Public Radio, you should. It's like nothing you've ever heard before. Go to the podcast website and listen to the episodes in order. 'Serial' patiently re-investigates a 15-year-old American murder case:
On January 13, 1999, a girl named Hae Min Lee, a senior at Woodlawn High School in Baltimore County, Maryland, disappeared. A month later, her body turned up in a city park. She'd been strangled. Her 17-year-old ex-boyfriend, Adnan Syed, was arrested for the crime, and within a year, he was convicted and sentenced to spend the rest of his life in prison. The case against him was largely based on the story of one witness, Adnan’s friend Jay, who testified that he helped Adnan bury Hae's body. But Adnan has always maintained he had nothing to do with Hae’s death. Some people believe he’s telling the truth. Many others don’t.
'Serial' uses the unique openness of the American criminal justice system: the reporter, Sarah Koenig, plays audio recordings of the actual trials of Syed (the first ended in a mistrial), interviews jury members, and plays for us long excerpts of her conversations with Syed from the Maryland Correctional Center. She re-interviews witnesses at the original trial, and many who didn't testify. She visit the places where things important to the case happened. Experts on everything from cellphone tower tracing to attorney competence to police investigations to psychopath and personality disorders weigh in on both the original evidence and what Koenig's team have uncovered since the trial. She discovers some new evidence that seems to point away from Syed's guilt, and other new evidence that is either ambiguous or, as we lawyers say, 'unhelpful' to Syed. And then she speaks directly to Syed on the telephone and asks for his comments on what she's found. Syed is not your average convicted murderer -- he's intelligent, articulate, and a model prisoner, and knows precisely when to parry and when to thrust in response to accusations.
The podcast has sparked huge interest, with over a million people listening, and partisan commentary raging all over the Internets. The last episode broadcasts today and is already available for download, but I haven't heard it yet. The comedy sketch above satirizes one aspect of 'Serial' -- its open-endedness. Many want the podcast to end with everything tied into a neat little bow: Syed is innocent, and I found the magic bullet that proves it! Syed is guilty and has been lying all along, and I uncovered the magic bullet that proves it! To these people, the podcast seems to meander back and forth between trying to convince listeners Syed is innocent and sadly confirming the charming young sociopath's guilt.
This attitude slights 'Serial's' genuine achievement, which is precisely its openness, its effort to bring the reader along on a journey to genuine understanding. Journalists -- especially German ones -- are prone to be condescending crusaders, spoon-feeding their readers one-sided narratives intended to hammer home Approved Opinions™ about everything from the death penalty to fracking to immigration to Greek finances. To make sure nothing complicates the lesson, these journalists swallow the most outlandish tales of victimization, ignore glaring contradictions, and leave contrary viewpoints and empirical verification outside in the cold. Not all of them, to be sure -- there are lots of German journos doing solid, thoughtful work. And the problem ain't just Germany. Why, just last month a major American magazine published a made-up-story of gang rape based on a teenager's romantic catfishing ploy without doing even the simplest verification.
Koenig treats her listeners like adults, in fact almost like accomplices in the investigation. And on the way, she illustrates a number of points that ordinary people don't understand about criminal investigations (full disclosure: I was a criminal defense lawyer in a previous life):
  • Eyewitnesses who saw the same incident often -- in fact usually -- describe it in inconsistent ways, which makes eyewitness testimony one of the leading causes of false convictions.
  • Many criminal cases are based on the testimony of acomplices who are just as guilty, if not even more guilty, than the defendant they testify against.
  • Men and women who are guilty of crimes can adamantly and convincingly protest their innocence. Many can even do so sincerely, because they have convinced themselves they are innocent.
  • Since most normal humans are lucky enough never to have never encountered a sociopathic liar willing to recite detailed, convincing lies to another person, they are often taken in by these people. (I'm looking at you, European women who marry American death-row inmates).
  • The way in which a person reacts to news of a loved one's death is so individual and unpredictable that it's meaningless as a clue to guilt or innocence.
  • If you hire a private criminal defense lawyer in the U.S., there is no effective real-time regulation of that person's fee policies or performance. If they make an error that leads to you being convicted, you can only argue about that after the fact in expensive appeals, and you face a forbidding standard in proving your case.
  • Notorious criminal cases attract unstable people who will do everything from claiming responsibility for horrific murders to fabricating evidence for or against the accused.
  • If you investigate any incident long enough, you will inevitably come across spectacularly improbable 'coincidences', such as the fact that the man who discovered Lee's body happened to be a notorious streaker who once intentionally exposed himself naked in public to a female police officer in uniform. (After he waggled his dong at her he ran away. She found his clothes and confiscated them).

During her patient re-investigation of Lee's death, Koenig encounters almost all of these vagaries of investigation. She shows how the fabric of reality attending the actual events starts dissolving immediately, and decomposes further with every passing day until the original pattern is irretrievably lost -- or distorted by bias, error, or selective memory. Koenig can't wrap the events up in a neat little bundle because this isn't fiction, there is no bundle, there is no happy ending. It is to her credit that she chose a case marked by ambiguity, and that she resisted the urge to channel the facts she found into a pat, tidy, misleading narrative. By doing so, she conveys profound truths about memory, bias, violence, and justice. 'Serial', if you ask me is journalism at its finest.

Internet K-Hole / Das Internet K-Loch

The new batch of photos from the inimitabe Internet K-Hole is up on tumblr. Curator Babs welcomes submissions -- in fact one of the new photos is from my personal hoard (can you guess which one? No, not the one above). Given how metal-friendy Germany is, there are doubtless thousands of snaps moldering in basements in Hereford, Oer-Erkenschwick or Dibbersen that need to be on Internet K-Hole. Get after it, comrades.

Bleg for Facebook Solutions Please?

As I noted, I now post mainly to Facebook. This blog is a hobby, not a business, and I only have spare time in which to maintain it, so I am not going to waste time copying identical content from Facebook to here. I did add an RSS feed to my Facebook profile, apparently, but I'm not sure how that works.

What would be ideal is to have Facebook posts appear here as well as on Facebook, so that all my readers will be happy. So I've been looking into options.

However, the solutions that have been proposed so far don't really work for me. I could migrate this blog to Wordpress, which apparently has some sort ot integration feature, but Wordpress is a much more time-consuming and technical platform than Typepad, and the migration process is not worth figuring out.

I tried to put a Facebook 'Like Box' widget on this blog but I have tried that and it doesn't show up. Apparently you cannot use this widget for personal facebook feeds, but only facebook pages (which are mainly used by businesses or groups). If I convert my personal profile to a page, according to Facebook, I lose my entire history.

So what I'm saying, dear readers, is that I am out of ideas. I am now looking for is a simple, easy way to have my Facebook feed show up somewhere on this Typepad blog, without moving or migrating or converting anything. I am even willing to pay a certain amount of money (for some sort of app) to make this happen! It just has to be simple.

If anyone has ideas, I would be grateful to hear them in comments. And not to be too shirty about it, but if you're considering posting yet another comment about how Evil Facebook Is, don't waste your time. That train sailed long ago.

Blogging is So 2010, Long Live Blogging

Draught donkey powering millstone

Blah. What am I going to do with this blog? Germany is boring.

The food is bland. The cities are well-run marvels. The weather is the weather. The politicians are colorless functionaries.

To quote Max Hastings, 'nothing ever happens in Germany.'

The press is even duller: a never-ending carousel of the same old '68 generation has-beens (Prantl! Knopp! Augstein! Niejahr! Pohl! Fleischhauer! Schleiermacher or Schnellschnorrer or whoever that guy from FAZ is! di Lorenzo channeling Schmidt!). The mainstream press circles around the same hobbyhorses like a donkey tied to a millstone: Eurocrisis. Energiewende. Rich-poor gap. Genetically modified whatever. Brussels. Europe. What will happen to [insert tiny, meaningless third party here]?!? End of print. Dangers of Facebook/Twitter/Google. Death penalty. Why we claim to hate ze sweatshops but love ze low prices. Stress/burnout. Eurocrisis. Energiewende... rinse and repeat, ad infinitum.

About 4 years, 3 months, and 15 days ago, I had an epiphany: If I began reading a German news article, especially an opinion piece, I could predict its slant after reading the first sentence, or sometimes just the headline. I would cover the rest of the article and mentally forecast what I would read. After my accuracy rose above about 80%, I finally gave up.

Mocking German smugness, complacency, self-satisfaction, and parochialism is fun at first but it's uncharitable and it gets old. Besides, as Tom Waits once said about writing political songs, it's about as effective as throwing peanuts at a gorilla.

Also, I have real work to do.

Yet I don't want to just let this blog die. That would be weak and cowardly.

So, I'm going to take it in a crazy new direction. Better yet, several crazy new directions at once! The only thing is, I haven't figured out what they are going to be yet. I think I'll just turn this blog into an unfiltered stream-of-consciousness experiment possessing no unifying theme. Or maybe it'll be opera DVD reviews. Pictures of spiders. Erotic ice-cube molds. Or all at the same time!

Suggestions are welcome in comments, yet most will be ignored.

Stay tuned!