Mending Wall (updated 12jan19)

About

January 2019
S	M	T	W	T	F	S
	1	2	3	4	5
6	7	8	9	10	11	12
13	14	15	16	17	18	19
20	21	22	23	24	25	26
27	28	29	30	31

OUR LINKS

YubaNet
White House Blog
Watts Up With That?
The Union
Sierra Thread
RL “Bob” Crabb
Barry Pruett Blog

Mending Wall (updated 12jan19)

08 January 2019

Robert Frost

Something there is that doesn't love a wall,

That sends the frozen-ground-swell under it,

And spills the upper boulders in the sun;

And makes gaps even two can pass abreast.

The work of hunters is another thing:

I have come after them and made repair

Where they have left not one stone on a stone,

But they would have the rabbit out of hiding,

To please the yelping dogs. The gaps I mean,

No one has seen them made or heard them made,

But at spring mending-time we find them there.

I let my neighbour know beyond the hill;

And on a day we meet to walk the line

And set the wall between us once again.

We keep the wall between us as we go.

To each the boulders that have fallen to each.

And some are loaves and some so nearly balls

We have to use a spell to make them balance:

"Stay where you are until our backs are turned!"

We wear our fingers rough with handling them.

Oh, just another kind of out-door game,

One on a side. It comes to little more:

There where it is we do not need the wall:

He is all pine and I am apple orchard.

My apple trees will never get across

And eat the cones under his pines, I tell him.

He only says, "Good fences make good neighbours."

Spring is the mischief in me, and I wonder

If I could put a notion in his head:

"Why do they make good neighbours? Isn't it

Where there are cows? But here there are no cows.

Before I built a wall I'd ask to know

What I was walling in or walling out,

And to whom I was like to give offence.

Something there is that doesn't love a wall,

That wants it down." I could say "Elves" to him,

But it's not elves exactly, and I'd rather

He said it for himself. I see him there

Bringing a stone grasped firmly by the top

In each hand, like an old-stone savage armed.

He moves in darkness as it seems to me,

Not of woods only and the shade of trees.

He will not go behind his father's saying,

And he likes having thought of it so well

He says again, "Good fences make good neighbours."

[12jan19 gjr update] From some of the comments below it appears that a word of clarification is required, not only about Frost’s poem but also walls, fences, and other things that demark and control access. Such constructs are nothing more than the existential and visible attributes of contracts that define property rights within a society. These transmit the unambiguous message that this side belongs to me, and the other side belongs to someone else; and I don’t want someone from the other side coming unbeknownst to me onto my property from where I have constructed my wall/fence or any other kind of barrier. For access to my property at certain locations I have provided gates, the states of which I can control, and therefore control access to my property.

People who don’t share the value of such rights, and perhaps feel that these delineated things should be owned in common, or at least be shared unhindered, will oppose physical barriers that unambiguously define ownership and provide for non-owner access only at the pleasure of the owner.

Today such values are very much the topic of hot debate between ideologically estranged peoples and nations. Conservatives and libertarians are very much proponents of property rights and such expression of these rights. They believe that property (and any asset of value) that is owned by everyone is owned by no one, and treated as such. (cf. Garrett Hardin's 'Tragedy of the Commons') Everywhere that property is ‘owned by the people’, it is actually owned by their government which visibly deports itself as owner. The definition of ownership is straightforward – you own something only to the extent that you can dispose of it as you will. The thinking person immediately understands that ownership is not a simple ‘you own it, or you don’t’. Instead, they know that ownership is very much nuanced, and that anything owned can also be taken insidiously and stage wise from the weaker by the stronger. In the US we have seen such erosion of ownership occur with many things, including real property and firearms. In an autocracy (which we are fast becoming) such subtle transfers of ownership are replaced by more direct and unambiguous methods.

(In understanding ownership, be careful not to confuse that notion with the responsibility for and/or accountability for the disposition of said property by its de juris owner or any third party.)

Posted in Critical Thinking & Numeracy, Culture Comments, Current Affairs, Our Country

64 responses to “Mending Wall (updated 12jan19)”

Gregory

13 January 2019

Here’s another view from philosopher Onora O’Neil:
https://books.google.com/books/about/Justice_Across_Boundaries.html?id=VaqzCwAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=kp_read_button#v=onepage&q&f=false

LikeLike
Steven Frisch

13 January 2019

I never said that the neighbor did not believe that good fences make good neighbors; I asked if George realized that in the eyes of the poems progressive protagonist the wall is not a good thing.
He chose to take the question down the property rights rabbit hole.
But the poem is not even about the wall, the wall is just a metaphor…the poem is about the shared responsibilities we have in a society, some of which we may not like or even agree with, but which we accept because we are a part of society and the world doesn’t fucking revolve around us.
But how about you start re-writing Leaves of Grass…the way your crew re-interprets Orwell, or misinterprets the Tragedy of the Commons, or twists any other cultural icon to fit their pre-conceived world view to use like a “stone grasped firmly by the top In each hand, like an old-stone savage armed.”

LikeLike
George Rebane

13 January 2019

StevenF 530pm – Missed again Steve (you’re as regular as clockwork). In my analysis I specifically pointed out the debate between the neighbors – one a proponent of walls, the other not. And then in what to you was another misunderstood “rabbit hole”, I expanded on the function of walls and surmised a reasonable basis for Frost’s wall proponent. I readily admit that there are multiple interpretations of ‘Mending Wall’, as there are of any such poem. But your position, quite understandable, is that it is the interpretation you favor or it is error.
As a Bayesian, I can’t say with certainty that my interpretation of Frost’s poem is correct, though I believe it to be plausible (cf also Gregory’s 508pm). Therefore, there may yet arrive evidence that makes me change my mind. But you have always been a consensus kind of guy, with a keen eye to selecting the consensus that fits your ideology/narrative. My career on the bleeding edge has been bountiful, perhaps, because my training and mentors echoed Richard Feynman’s, “If you thought that science was certain – well, that is just an error on your part”, “Distrust of experts is the cornerstone of science”, and “I would rather have questions that can’t be answered than answers that can’t be questioned.”

LikeLike
Bill Tozer

13 January 2019

Tricky, no bricks in the wall. Not earthquake proof.
https://m.facebook.com/RowdyConservatives/photos/a.217983685002343/1521544897979542/?type=3&source=48

LikeLike
Steven Frisch

13 January 2019

Posted by: George Rebane | 13 January 2019 at 05:57 PM
I posited nothing to begin with George, I asked you a question, which rather than answering you used an an opportunity to “update” your post.
You cannot defend your position ex post facto.

LikeLike
Gregory

13 January 2019

“You cannot defend your position ex post facto.”
-Frisch, 614pm
That is a right that Frisch reserves for himself.
And, turning the Wayback machine to the days of the NH2020 debacle, Frisch’s side was clearly in the camp of those who did not want to observe the property boundaries in order to look for unique members of the biosphere that might sit on private property owned by folk who did not trust the Gang of Four or the Truckee 501c3 they hired to push their agenda hidden behind their boundaries as a private company.

LikeLike
Steven Frisch

14 January 2019

Posted by: Gregory | 13 January 2019 at 07:31 PM
So Greg, do you deny that, 1) I asked the question I stated above, and 2) George responded not directly but rather by updating the original post to include his discourse on property rights?
BTW, you have the NH2020 history wrong again…doing biological resources assessments does not require nor did NH 2020 inspect anyones property without their approval. The analysis was done with GIS mapping to look at vegetation type, wetlands, habitat type, etc.
Although a lot of hysterical old men bitched about their perception that someone was going to trespass on their property, there was never any verified case of anyone doing so.
In addition all of the instructions by both the County and SBC to the team doing the biological resources study (all pretty established and trusted scientists) had specific statements requiring the never go on private property.
So in other words, your perceptions are just the crazed ramblings of a conspiracy theorist crank with no merit.

LikeLike
George Rebane

14 January 2019

SteveF 614pm – Your kind likes making a lot of rules for others; God help us if/when you also get the power to enforce them. We already see which direction such hubris has taken our country.
“You cannot defend your position ex post facto.”
I most certainly can ‘defend’ or explain my position at any time and in any way I choose. And when I consider that a commenter has made a relevant contribution to my commentary, or, as in your case, has committed an egregious error, I often choose to addend or update my original post so as to highlight the point for other readers, and not bury my answer and/or view in the comment stream. To do so is my prerogative as the owner and host of this weblog. You literally have no say in the manner other than to grouse, advise us again about the world according to Frisch, and/or depart.

LikeLike
Gregory

14 January 2019

So, after “a lot of hysterical old men bitched” (nice mix of misogynous and androgynous metaphors there, Steve), there wasn’t any verified case of private property incursion.
I suppose had they not “bitched”, you and the County would have still made sure no inspections of people’s property would have been made without their permission?
And the wretchedly misnamed “Sierra Business Council” (it isn’t a Council of Businesses) practically gave away their services to the Gang of Four (the Progressives who got elected to the board of Supervisors), only charging one third of the cost of NH 2020. You even ran the “town hall meetings” designed to drive the rubes to the predetermined choices.
Great work, gentlemen.
A “conspiracy theorist crank”? Moi? I’m the one who doesn’t see a commie bastard behind every imagined Agenda 21 reference, Steve. However, I do see you “ex post facto” covering your ass with wild accusations against people who don’t trust you as far as they can spit.
Checking, the photos of SBC staff on your website show them still to be lily white and mostly female. Tsk, tsk.

LikeLike
Gregory

14 January 2019

That should have read “misogynous and misandrous metaphors”. Got the adjectival form of misandry wrong.

LikeLike
Bill Tozer

14 January 2019

Not trying to interrupt your thread, dear gentlemen, but this link is sort of on topic to the issues that are being raised about the Wall, pro and con, from property rights to bigger global issues.
“A wall is both a symbolic and substantive rejection of the globalists’ open-border, national sovereignty-despising agenda.”
https://patriotpost.us/articles/60510-anti-wall-equals-pro-globalism?fbclid=IwAR3LBSHqaBEGGwghLF4aRKPdNQVgUDZJl2u2Gs_7BR0XV7LRZ5wJqbvmpAI

LikeLike
George Rebane

14 January 2019

BillT 1025am – Really Mr Tozer?! 😉

LikeLike
Steven Frisch

19 January 2019

Still not stunned that propagandists even try to shift cultural icons that do not support their world view to their advantage.

LikeLike
Don Bessee

19 January 2019

https://www.yahoo.com/news/why-did-democrats-vote-barrier-214218216.html
😉

LikeLike