CaptainCrawl is THE music blog index, type in an artist name and check out what comes up, you should be able to find links to blogs with full albums to download.

Radiobutt was the best music blog around, dude put up all the newest indie albums, had a really good site. It was hit hard by the music industry cops, relaunched and then mysteriously went down again. If you click on the link for it you’ll can read the guy’s farewell, he doesn’t say anything about the industry, but I’d bet the constant threat of legal action finally put him off. This interview between radiobutt and captaincrawl is essential reading for Wednesday night, CC says so many things that mirror what I think.  radiobuttmusic-vs-captaincrawl

I also wanted to link to Patch, which is one of our people’s current gig, a local community news sources that I think is an example of one of the ways people are trying to make a buck off news in a creative way these days.

(From Rindy):

For ideas about the future of journalism, it’s worth reading some of the work of NYU media critic Jay Rosen. He writes often about the ills of the national press today, who believe in what he calls “the Church of the Savvy“:

To the savvy, the center is a holy place: political grace resides there. The profane is the ideological extremes. The adults converse in the pragmatic middle ground where insiders cut their deals. On the wings are the playgrounds for children.  But to argue directly for these propositions is out of the question: political reporters don’t conduct arguments, they tell us what’s happening!  Instead an argument is made by positioning the players a certain way while reporting the news and doing “analysis.”

Another lament of his is He Said, She Said Journalism, in which “balance” is created by reporting what both sides say about a dispute (there are always two sides, never three or four) without bothering to fact check the obvious clashes of truth in the arguments. It’s practices like this that have readers seeking out new outlets for journalism. Where the news has traditionally given us the View From Nowhere (the myth of objectivity), we’re more interested now in reading honest analysis from writers who are upfront about their own opinions and who document their work thoroughly for others to follow.

For a great example, read what Mac McClelland has been reporting on the oil spill, and the heinous way in which BP has been treating journalists.

The next Junta will take on a subject that is sure to scuttle consensus. We are going to meet to discuss changes in the world of music and media being brought upon by technology. Titled the Creative Destruction Junta in a nod to that economic term whereby one industry dies as times change but in its wake comes a new industry with accompanying new jobs. It sounds like it fits together quite nicely, and while it has proven to be a sound economic concept, it doesn’t necessarily speak to the impact of those lost jobs, those changed lifestyles, and what is lost in the process.

The music industry has been the impetus for this discussion. There are a number of musicians in the Junta and this debate has come up already a number of times, in part at the Downtown music scene Junta, many moons ago at a forgotten East Village bar (read the intro and the wrap to that meeting, from Dec 2008). Essentially we have witnessed the drastic hollowing of the music industry machine as technology has lowered the barrier to entry in both recording and marketing. The compact of the past between musicians and industry has been one whereby the music company would take a gamble on a new act, making a large capital investment in studio time (which historically has been very expensive) and in promoting the band. The odds of success were low, but the record company would recoup its investment on the occasionally blockbuster act that made it millions. Most bands made very little off this model, but it was the only way to get heard by a wider audience.

In the 21st Century that has changed. Bands can now record an album with sophisticated programs on their own computers for very little. They can post the album online for free and reach the whole world. The limits are only on ability, marketing savvy and drive. Traditionally, musicians have made money off playing live with the record companies, as mentioned, receiving the lion’s share of the profits. Records are still made with the backing of the industry, but the evolution of online piracy—from file-trading to the blog revolution—has undermined this model. Now an album has become, in many ways, a business card—“come see me when I hit your home town”.

But there is something lost in this. Bands that work hard to record an album, often with the backing of a scrappy label staffed by dedicated music-heads, are often not making enough to scratch out a living. It is also pretty mind-boggling to figure out what to check out for the average listener.

The world of media has also been hugely affected by the technological changes of recent years. Print media has been devastated by the need to establish an online presence and react to the overwhelming feeling of the online community that its content should be free. The partisan echo chamber has been exacerbated with those on all sides now turning to their favorite bloggers or slanted news source to reinforce their beliefs. This has, in many ways, narrowed and infantilized our society. The implications on our society are potentially huge.

Do you download music? How do you justify it? Are you willing to pay to read a news story, even a few cents? We’re looking forward to hearing your thoughts when gather next, on 6/30 (to be confirmed).

The majority of Gazans have no electricity for 8-10 hours per day on account of Israel having destroyed the area’s only power plant and not permitting it to be rebuilt. Something close to 100% of the water in Gaza is contaminated, because the sewage system has been destroyed, and the Israelis will not allow materials into Gaza that might fix it. The WHO has reported that “In the Gaza Strip, private enterprise is practically at a standstill as a consequence of the blockade. Almost all (98%) industrial operations have been shut down.”

The above figures are taken from this article at Foreign Policy, which lays out more of the crisis in detail.

The Israelis claim to be blocking only items that can be used as weapons, and yet they have prevented many food items from entering Gaza, such as fresh meat, canned fruit, and certain spices, which obviously have no weapons use. This chart from the Economist lays out some of the things which have been blocked.

The BBC has further details about the costs of the occupation and blockade, including revelations like this:

• the number of Gazans that the UN helps who are unable to buy basic items such as soap, stationary and safe drinking water has tripled since 2007
• Gaza unemployment is near 40%, so many people cannot buy supplies even when they are available
• The UN’s FAO says $180m of trees, fields, livestock, greenhouses and nurseries were destroyed during operation Cast Lead. The Palestinian Authority estimates 15% of agricultural land was destroyed

All of this is being done to punish the Palestinians for electing “the wrong government”. While Hamas has certainly committed acts of terrorism, it is clear that the effects of the occupation and the blockade amount to terror wielded against the Palestinians. We condemn Osama Bin Laden when he justifies attacks against Americans by saying that America is a democracy and the people have chosen their government, yet when we see the Palestinians elect a government we do not like, we find it justifiable to commit terror against them. I say “we”, because I am an American, and because America is Israel’s partner in these efforts. If we did not finance and defend these actions, we would not be culpable. Alas, we are.

So frustrating reading about the Israeli raid on the flotillaoff the coast of Gaza. While I think the Israelis did a relatively poor job of operational planning (they expected to catch the people on the ship asleep and not particularly violent) and weren’t exactly nimble in terms of their PR response to the deaths on board, the outcry is part of the continued hypocrisy of how Israel is treated internationally.

Turkey has been the most strident in its criticism, but the reasons why are a bit more complex than what Prime Minister Erdogan would have you believe. Erdogan is from an Islamist party that has challenged–successfully–the secular establishment that has ruled Turkey since it become a modern country. He has slowly eroded the ties with Israel (the closest of any Muslim nation) and this current imbroglio (the ship raided was flying  a Turkish flag) has given him the pretext to whip even more anti-Israel sentiment to burnish his religious and nationalist credentials ahead of an election that will take place approximately a year from now. Anyone who has seen the footage of Israeli commandos being hammered with metal rods as they landed on the deck, or thrown overboard, might disagree that deaths on board, however unfortunate, were not a “bloody massacre”. That’s just one of the many virulent statements he has made in the last 24 hours that make him sound less like the statesmen of a country that aspires to join the EU and more like Ahmadinejad. Erdogan is taking his place in a long line of Muslim leaders using the Palestinians as pawns to both advance their own parochial political interests and distract attention from problems at home.

Even more frustrating is watching Euro-liberals posturing like revolutionaries over this. I was watching the BBC when Bangkok was going to hell recently and they had an interview with a Brit who was hunkered down with the Red Shirts, dude fancied himself a modern Che Guevara and obviously had little understanding of the nuance of the local situation, it was easier to say it’s rich versus poor than really understand the complexity of what was going on. Similarly, the mingling of latent anti-Semitism and guilt over both colonialism and historic anti-Jewish feeling colors the Left in Europe and the people who were on board those ships and protesting in European capitals. They should look in the mirror and understand that the legacy of their country’s colonialism is the root of most modern conflicts. Similarly, they can avoid remembering what actually spurred Zionism and the establishment of the state of Israel (European anti-semitism) and continue to revel in seeing the Israelis acting like fascists if that’s how they want to view it, but they are deluding themselves. There is no humanitarian disaster in Gaza, no one is starving and food and medicine flows into Gaza. If the people there want a better life they should get rid of the terrorist organization that they have put in power and who are responsible for their misery and isolation. And if the clueless lefties want to do something real to help people who are actually suffering they should go to Darfur or Congo.

But Thaksin didn’t take to exile well and has spent years battling to get back to Thailand and has fueld the fire of class struggle as a stalking horse for his own ambitions. And now Thai society is turned upside down. Some are talking about establishing a Republic, further minimizing the role of the King. The nature of democracy and the social fabric of the country is tattered, the rural north feeling enraged by recent events; no one has talked for a while about the Muslim insurgency in the south, but that is still simmering. In short, Thailand could be pulled apart.

I used to tell people who hadn’t been to Asia before that Thailand was the best first country to visit. Beautiful, exotic, great food, amazing beaches, beautiful temples, friendly people who speak English and Thailand is used to tourists. But now how can I say that? The NY Times had one of the better stories I’ve read recently today and I thought this quote was a particularly powerful summary about the events in Thailand for those who have followed the country for years.

“This is the worst crisis Thailand has had, ever, probably — maybe World War II — and where we go from here I don’t think anybody knows,” said Charles Keyes, an anthropologist at the University of Washington, Seattle, who has devoted much of his life to the study of Thailand.

“My understanding of what I have learned over the years here has really come into question,” he said. “I question all the things I’ve learned about this country.”

http://www.alternet.org/media/146752/how_glenn_beck_re-invented_himself_as_a_crying_conservative?page=entire

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/17/opinion/17krugman.html?hp

http://www.alternet.org/news/146403/the_five_creepiest_moments_of_the_southern_republican_leadership_conference/?page=3

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/16/opinion/16rich.html?src=me&ref=opinion

Patti recalled coming to New York without money, when it was “down and out,” and you could get a cheap apartment and “build a whole community of transvestites,” artists or writers, or whatever.

Today, she said, “New York has closed itself off to the young and the struggling. But there are other cities. Detroit. Poughkeepsie… New York City has been taken away from you… So my advice is: Find a new city.”

Patti’s words picked up steam when the Huffington Post ran it, but the original source was a blog called “Jeremiah’s Vanishing New York“. In both places, the item stirred a number of reader comments:

This is true only if you consider downtown Manhattan to be the horizon line for “the city,” which would be unfortunate. #

To “build a whole community of transvestites or artists or writers” is to start the gentrification process. This can be accomplished in the South Bronx or other places in the “outer boroughs.” #

The need to be close to the art scene in New York to get noticed is negated by the internet. We’re talking actual freedom here, not just slightly cheaper rent. #

If you’re good and you have talent you can make it here, no problem. #

Between the Guliani [sic] effect (although crime stats were already down before his mayoralty), Sex and the City, and the real estate boom, the city has become extremely homogenized and lost most of its soul. The newbies brought too many cars with them, and think it’s weird to talk to strangers. #

As I was following the links last week, I became wrapped up in this blog Vanishing New York. Before I knew it, I’d spent most of the morning reading the archives. The writer focuses on what was just touched on in that last comment: gentrification and what he calls the “yunnie” phenomenon – Young Urban Narcissists. Think Patrick Bateman in American Psycho. Have you seen or read it again lately? Though it was set in the 80s, it doesn’t seem dated at all. You can see Bateman-style condos for sale all over the city.

Check out some more Vanishing New York, this is a great blog:

• American Psychos
• Post-Crash Revisionism
• Park Slopers Want Geisha Girl

John J will lead a Junta discussion on Friday April, 30 at 6pm. Here he explains his topic:

Avant-garde, Modernism, Impressionism, Cubism, Dadaism, Surrealism, Abstract Expressionism, Minimalism, Conceptualism, Pop, Post-Modern, Post-Pop, Neoism, YBA’s.

In the 20th century the artist moved from purely an object maker and into the realm of politics and social interrogation. Duchamp began this process as the antagonist to traditions by breaking every rule in the book, opening art up to a much larger and undefined cultural space. As a result, the Dadaists confronted us with the absurd, the Surrealists took us into our subconscious, while the Situationists took us headlong into politics.

Nowadays, movements and generalities about the art world are harder to define. The overlap, derivative, mash-ups of contemporary styles and techniques make it a very interesting time. All the knowledge of the past seems to be funneled into today, with artists able to take advantage of the past’s analog techniques while combining them with digital and computer technologies.

Elwa is most interested in where this overlap takes place. That is why we represent artists using traditional mediums, such as pottery and ceramics, while incorporating new technologies and techniques unavailable only ten years ago. Artists that are speaking to our time in some way: through painterly investigations of technology, or sculptural creations that speak about our role in nature.

Many people find contemporary art foreboding and elitist. Its meaning or intention can be lost on many viewers. In many ways the insular and elitist nature of the art world is intentional. These hierarchies are created and maintained through art school training, art criticism, social standing, and most cynically, manipulation. Although not the focus of our discussion, it is important to understand some of ways in which “great” art is defined and promoted.

Elwa’s goal is to try and dismantle some of this façade: to show that in fact, contemporary art is more accessible than ever before. Talent is all over the place, not just at museums. Great art is not just for billionaires and kings.

This will be a BYOB Junta, held in a private apartment.

6pm-8pm, Friday, April 30. BYOB. Address forthcoming.

It’s confusing, and I think that the red shirts are sympathetic to the extent that they feel like their voice in a democracy has been drowned out; the guy that they elected—Thaksin—was pushed from power in a coup a few years ago and is now living in exile. I’m not going to post at such a length to even begin to clarify the complexity here, but Thaksin is a Berlusconi-type character, if you haven’t followed Thai politics that much, and was in the process of setting himself as the richest man in the country and amassing unassailable power. He courted the poor while lining his pockets and was slowly squeezing democracy. I honestly believe that the Thai military acted in the best interests of the country when it removed him. And the Thai king—a source of great reverence in Thailand—gave his blessing to the new government. But Thaksin has stirred trouble from abroad, first from England, and now from Saudi Arabia, likely funding the mass of “red shirts” that have brought political life in Bangkok to a standstill until their demands are met. Those demands are mostly about new elections, which Thaksin’s proxy party would likely win.

Which brings us back to the question of democracy, which we touched upon months ago during a small but rowdy session in the east village on whether democracy was always best for a country or whether something like Singapore’s benign authoritarianism is the best course for a developing country. I still don’t have a decisive opinion, but the violence in Thailand, and upcoming elections in the Philippines keep the idea in mind.

I thought this was a particularly interesting point on how Krugman really made a name for himself:

One implication of Krugman’s theory was that, contrary to economic orthodoxy, industrial policy might have its benefits. If the location of a new industry was essentially arbitrary, then a government, by subsidizing and protecting its emergence, could enable it to gain such a lasting advantage that other countries would find it difficult to catch up.

It goes on to point out how he found the arbitrary nature of the location of industry “deeply disturbing and troubling”. What it made me think of what some people are calling China’s Green Leap Forward. I mostly complain about China, but I admire them in this respect, if they can apply Krugman’s theory to what they are trying to do, and leverage their advantages in engineering, cheap labor, and infrastructure, they could corner the market on what will (hopefully) be one of the biggest developing industries of the 21st century.