White Men Cannot Be Relied On
I realize that I'm a couple of days late coming to this party, so I apologize if this is rehashing an old subject. On the one hand, the statement above is one of the stupidest things I've ever read and proof yet again that just because you may have a talent (i.e. writing, singing, acting, etc.), it doesn't mean that you're smart.
On the other hand, Nora Ephron's statement, not to mention her delicious codicil ("...as all of us know who have spent a lifetime dating them"), is the feminist spin on Leftist Philosophy 101. It's her version of Obama's "bitter" statement. And in a way, it also provides an answer to LAGuy's post on Causality below.
If you take the statement (white men cannot be relied on) and substitute "people" - or "the masses", if you will - you have leftist philosophy in a nutshell. Right now the Democratic Party is dominated by this philosophy and both their candidates for President embody it. People cannot be relied on: To vote for the right person. To believe in Global Warming. To surrender in Iraq. To accept income redistribution and higher taxes. To stop smoking. Or drinking. Or getting fat. Or believing in God. Driving SUV's.
Or, most importantly, to realize that government - specifically a government led by either Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton - is the answer to everything that's wrong with their lives.
In this world view, the individual is the enemy. The collective is the answer.
In LAGuy's post, he argues that questioning motives rather than policies is reasoning backwards. While I understand and agree with his premise, at least insofar as it applies to George W. Bush, when it comes to the Left, things get a bit stickier. Certainly, you can make the argument that W. is using the War on Terror as an excuse to erode our civil rights. However, with the statement that the Left is using environmentalism to bring us socialism, there is no argument.
Oh sure, you can argue the semantics: socialism may be putting too fine a point on it. But there is no arguing the intent. For the Left, the answer is always the government. The question is really irrelevant.
Only the government can be relied on.
posted by VermontGuy @ 5:56 AM
7 Comments:
I agree that "Leftists" -whatever that means- often want to impose their will on the people find it difficult to ascribe the statement to just the left- all parties, movements, power center, isms, etc seem to share the belief that people should be empowered to make their own decisions as long as they are the decisions we want them to make.
Tit for tat, you can replace list in the post with other issues and call it a Republican, or Libertarian, or Christian (I refuse to use the silly rightist/leftist nomenclature) They think people cannot be relied upon to support the war, to remain vigilant against terrorism, to believe in family values, to believe their betters, to empower the executive, to not subsidize and give tax breaks to domestic oil and automotive industry and cronies(oops there's some socialism) etc.. One way of interpreting "Live free or die" is "Be a libertarian or I'll fuckin kill you"
Of course in a National Security State, the government is always the answer too.
Perhaps. First off, the point of the post was not to defend the "right" or conservatism or the republicans - whichever term you like best. And as far as cronyism is concerned, I find both parties equally guilty.
One difference between the parties is that the repubs aren't so openly disdainful of the people they're trying to woo (of course, some might claim that the repubs are simply better at hiding it). I might also argue that they are actually a bigger tent party than the dems, otherwise I don't think John McCain would be their nominee.
I find George Bush's constant mantra that he doesn't consult opinion polls in designing his policies to be opening disdainful of the people.
Of course, leaders should lead, and should not make policy changes based on rapid fluctuations, etc., but what the people think is not irrelevant, as his statements strongly suggest.
"openly" not "opening." Sorry
I don't think W. is being disdainful of people's opinions; I think he distrusts the polls. There have been - and continue to be - a number of problems with polling. Just look at the exit polls in the recent democratic primaries, for instance.
Plus, opinions are primarily based on perception and these days, perception is manipulated almost constantly. For example, the person who reads the NY Times and watches CNN will have a different perception than the person who watches Fox News and reads the Wall Street Journal.
Bush is a Burkean leader--the kind we admire in the abstract but hate in reality. He believes he's been elected to use his judgment, not to rubber stamp what the voters want.
It's Good Post
adobe premiere mac torrent
Post a Comment
<< Home