capnjosh

If you figure out all the below, like, actually do them all individually, you will be well on your way:

Excel
Pivot Tables
SQL Server installation (account security, file locations, backups, restores)
Joins, Updates from data in another table, deletes based on data in another table, index optimization.
Get data from a text file into a table, and vice-versa
Visual Studio (.NET) – Web Developer, C#
Create a Web Service
Consume a Web Service
Install Windows Server, turn on Windows Firewall, then punch holes for SQL Server, then access that SQL instance from another computer.
Understand why you would need to set up a static route (networking).
Set up a software load balancer and balance traffic between to (or more) servers (web traffic for simplicity)
Source Control (set up some SVN server and then access that SVN instance via Tortoise on another computer.

The Communist Manifesto has great points up until where it outlines the points that it asserts generally apply to advanced capitalist nations. And then it goes squarely into replacing one set of cultural elite with another, seemingly via force. Up until that section, there are some excellent points, but the conclusions on what ought to be done lacks the recognition that the problem he is railing against (cultural elites that largely control the population through exploit) is exactly that, a cultural problem. Cultural problems cannot be “fixed” by external forces. Their fundamental form consists of some critical mass of individuals all behaving in very similar ways, all without conscious edict. Identification of “problematic” cultural norms can only really be done when viewing the population in aggregate.

An example is in order. Taken in isolation, a single individual’s decision to not assert his or her concerns on a nearly-solidified decision because he or she believes it’s “not appropriate” or otherwise “unwelcome” can be interpreted as not that big a deal, even a sign of respect. However, taken in the aggregate, with thousands of people, if not millions, behaving in similar ways in their day-to-day lives, it becomes a significant factor in the overall economic climate of that social group. It becomes a social norm to not assert one’s views. One result is a disproportionate representation of the viewpoints of those people with assertive personalities. Going by Strengths Theory, this becomes a cause for concern, due to the fact that an individual is only ever really really good at 5-6 strengths (out of about 36); if 2 of those are taken up by self-assurance and optimism, it means a severely diminishing possibility of the individual containing exceptionally good decision-making skills. At the best, you simply have very few people who embody the necessary analytical strengths for great decision-making as well as the [culturally] necessary ideals of strength of conviction and charisma.

My point is that Marx identified a crucial, more fundamental way of looking at human sociological development, but he missed the bus on what ought to be done. He advocated a Proletariat revolt as the best way to get the underclasses up. He should have been thinking in terms of how to get the underclasses to “flourish” where they’re at. heh heh… he should have been writing self-help books.

I finally found and finished “Marx’s Revenge” by Meghnad Desai. I found it to be rather engaging. Part of my interest is in how Desai plows through the “short 20th century” in the detail and matter-of-factness of someone who obviously loves the subject matter.

His first-hand knowledge of the goings-on in economic and political thought allows him to provide a strong context for the various hot debates. Much how “Glimpses of World History” by Jawaharlal Nehru moves through historical events fast enough and with enough references to concurrent events worldwide so as to allow for what could be thought of as a holistic approach to history, Desai does the same for Political Economy. If you’re into Economics and the historical roots of why things are the way they are, I’d recommend it. Just make sure you read it quickly – it’s quite densely packed.

Desai’s “Marx’s Revenge” point is fairly interesting, if a bit of a stretch: Karl Marx was actually a Libertarian. His whole point about things becoming “socialist” was that one day, long from now, after everyone on the entire planet has for 2 generations or more been very consciously behaving as free-market capitalists will they sort of realize, “Hey… how funny… I’m acting like a socialist.” Their motivations will be fundamentally that of self-interest, but the efficiency with which they are able to do what they want to do has, in the aggregate, resulted in such low costs of living that everyone is effectively wealthy (material needs are absolutely met such that a significant portion of one’s time is spent following one’s passions). He saw that once everyone has become fully “capitalist” in their fundamental assumptions about life, human interaction, and how things ought to be, then strangely enough, they are actually socialist. Fascinating topic, this.