Skip to main content

Democrats to Demote Iowa and New Hampshire?

 

It is unlikely that the last word has been said on the subject. But the new Biden plan to rejigger the order of caucuses/primaries for the 2024 season is fascinating.



I think of ethanol. The idea of mixing corn alcohol with gasoline as a way of extending gas mileage, helping the environment, and whatever else (preventing children from getting cavities even if they eat candy?) has always been dubious. Now, in the midst of a move away from the internal combustion engine toward other methods of getting personal vehicles to take you where you want to go, it seems hidebound and reactionary, a way of trying to lock us in with the force of law to a technology we should cheerfully dismiss. 

Yet, for an obvious reason, Iowans love ethanol. They love rules that press upward on the price of their key export: corn. 

That is an adequate reason, IMHO, to demote Iowa.  

Labels:

Comments

  1. Paul D. Van PeltDecember 8, 2022 at 7:31 AM

    Interesting comment. I can't say that the internal combustion engine is dead, as yet, although it could be comatose. Buses in my city of residence are sometimes powered by natural gas, still, of course, IC. If I understand it correctly, it is also possible to use hydrogen as a fuel...all such exotics are on the low side of combustion emissions, more than gasoline and or alcohol. Electric cars? No so much utility there and a whole lot of initial outlay. My grandchildren' s children will have to figure it out, not me. I am a pragmatist, not necessarily an optimist.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Story About Coleridge

This is a quote from a memoir by Dorothy Wordsworth, reflecting on a trip she took with two famous poets, her brother, William Wordsworth, and their similarly gifted companion, Samuel Taylor Coleridge.   We sat upon a bench, placed for the sake of one of these views, whence we looked down upon the waterfall, and over the open country ... A lady and gentleman, more expeditious tourists than ourselves, came to the spot; they left us at the seat, and we found them again at another station above the Falls. Coleridge, who is always good-natured enough to enter into conversation with anybody whom he meets in his way, began to talk with the gentleman, who observed that it was a majestic waterfall. Coleridge was delighted with the accuracy of the epithet, particularly as he had been settling in his own mind the precise meaning of the words grand, majestic, sublime, etc., and had discussed the subject with William at some length the day before. “Yes, sir,” says Coleridge, “it is a majesti
7 comments
Read more

Five Lessons from the Allegory of the Cave

  Please correct me if there are others. But it seems to be there are five lessons the reader is meant to draw from the story about the cave.   First, Plato  is working to devalue what we would call empiricism. He is saying that keeping track of the shadows on the cave wall, trying to make sense of what you see there, will NOT get you to wisdom. Second, Plato is contending that reality comes in levels. The shadows on the wall are illusions. The solid objects being passed around behind my back are more real than their shadows are. BUT … the world outside the the cave is more real than that — and the sun by which that world is illuminated is the top of the hierarchy. So there isn’t a binary choice of real/unreal. There are levels. Third, he equates realness with knowability.  I  only have opinions about the shadows. Could I turn around, I could have at least the glimmerings of knowledge. Could I get outside the cave, I would really Know. Fourth, the parable assigns a task to philosophers
Post a Comment
Read more

Searle: The Chinese Room

John Searle has become the object of accusations of improper conduct. These accusations even have some people in the world of academic philosophy saying that instructors in that world should try to avoid teaching Searle's views. That is an odd contention, and has given rise to heated exchanges in certain corners of the blogosphere.  At Leiter Reports, I encountered a comment from someone describing himself as "grad student drop out." GSDO said: " This is a side question (and not at all an attempt to answer the question BL posed): How important is John Searle's work? Are people still working on speech act theory or is that just another dead end in the history of 20th century philosophy? My impression is that his reputation is somewhat inflated from all of his speaking engagements and NYRoB reviews. The Chinese room argument is a classic, but is there much more to his work than that?" I took it upon myself to answer that on LR. But here I'll tak
13 comments
Read more