an in-between move

Cool kids read The Bellman.


Don't read this blog!

I mean, thanks for dropping by my little corner of the blogospheric backwaters, but the blog you should be reading is The Bellman. The stuff I post there is much, much less likely to be imbued with dormitive powers.


[German, from zwischen, intermediate + zug, move

Literally an "in-between move". A move in a tactical sequence is called a zwischenzug* when it does not relate directly to the tactical motif in operation. |source|

image copyright TWIC

From this position, black played a zwischenzug: 19…d5
(Linares 2002, 1-0)


about your blogger

David Rowland studies philosophy at the University of Illinois - Urbana / Champaign, where he's an active member of the Graduate Employees Organization. He used to play a lot of chess, but wasn't all that good. He has a blog. And email.



The rich get richer
Zwichenzug culture watch
Friday fun for wonks
Details emerging
Will it ever end?
The Department of Education is a propaganda minist...
Gonna eat me a plate of biscuits and beans
The folly of fools is deceit
Slimy cheapish deafening toadeater
I want to move to Vermont


error log

January 2004  
February 2004  
March 2004  
April 2004  
May 2004  
June 2004  
July 2004  
August 2004  
September 2004  
October 2004  
November 2004  
December 2004  
January 2005  
February 2005  
March 2005  
April 2005  
May 2005  
June 2005  
July 2005  
August 2005  
September 2005  
October 2005  
November 2005  
December 2005  


$zwichenzug$ sell-out zone





Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under
a Creative Commons License.

Union Label

Direct Action
Gets the Goods!


some folks I know

Mark Dilley
a daily dose of architecture
Safety Neal
January Girl
mimi jingcha
Hop, Skip, Jump
ambivalent imbroglio
Brooke & Lian


some blogs I read

strip mining for whimsy
It's Matt's World
School of Blog
Fall of the State
Dru Blood
Echidne of the Snakes
Colossal Waste of Bandwidth
Running from the Thought Police
Bionic Octopus


some philosoblogs

Fake Barn Country
Freiheit und Wissen


some labor blogs

Confined Space
Working Life
Dispatches From the Trenches
Labor Blog
Eric Lee


some A-list blogs

This Modern World
Matthew Yglesias
Andrew Sullivan
Political Animal
The Volokh Conspiracy


some other links

Rule 33
This Week in Chess
War Nerd
National Priorities Project
Bible Gateway
Internet Archive
A Weekly Dose of Architecture
Orsinal: Morning Sunshine
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
Safety Sign Builder
Get Your War On


some philosoblogging

Six views about reasons
Seidman on reflection and rationality
And another thing
Tiffany's argument for strong internalism
Internalism v. Externalism
What do internalists believe anyway?
Rationalism and internalism
The experimental method in philosophy
Advertising to children
On moral skepticism
A linguistic argument
More on Williams
Williams on reasons
General and particular
Normativity and morality
Political intuitions
What it is, what it was, and what it shall be
Objectivity and morality
Thinking revolution
Abortion and coercion
Moore on torture
On the phenomenology of deliberation
Even more Deliberation Day
more Deliberation Day
Deliberation Day run-down
He made a porch for the throne where he might judge, cont.
He made a porch for the throne where he might judge
Every shepherd is an abomination
Droppin' H-bombs
ad hominem

Sunday, February 29, 2004



Aristide is out, and now we're sending in troops. This feels weird, but for once I approve of the Bush administration's handling of foreign policy. So far.

Back in the mists of time I opposed Clinton's 1994 intervention to prop up Aristide. This got me into several very unpleasant arguments. I don't clearly remember precisely what I was thinking back then, but it had something to do with respect for the sovereignty of other peoples. My thought was that it wasn't our place to step into disputes between Haitians.

I still basically agree with that, although I think a case can be made for intervention when there's evidence of mass atrocities.

By stepping in back in 1994, Clinton hoped to endorse the principle of democratic legitimacy. The idea wasn't that Aristide was our boy, but that Aristide had been duly elected. So we were supposedly there to support the democratic process and were saying to the rebels that if they wanted reform they would have to work the process.

The problem with that message is that it gets lost unless you follow it up. We didn't do anything when Aristide began consolidating his support and rigging elections. However legitimate Aristide was in 1994, that legitimacy was lost long ago. And it could be argued that part of the reason that he managed to stay in power so long is that the actions of the United States created the impression that he could count on the backing of the region's main power.

+ - + - + main + - + - +