The Most Important Election Ever in Our Lifetimes Ever now draws to a close, and some account of its passing is probably in order. We should probably recall that neither of the current candidates seemed especially likely back when there were still 7,000 aspirants in the primaries. McCain won because Romney and Huckabee cancelled each other out, leaving the Senator from Senescence to gather the war-focused remnants of the Bush II coalition and the 3 remaining Episcopalians in America. Giuliani's 11 supporters likewise glommed onto the McCain train after their shiny-pated madman bombed out early, perceiving in him the same over-compensatory anger that drew them to Rudy in the first place. Obama took the more traditional track of motivating "the base," in this case, lying relentlessly and transparently, if soaringly, to soi-disant anti-war Democrats and eking out a primary victory over the truly awful Hillary Clinton by running a moderately more effective campaign to turn out primary voters in the urban centers of large states.
McCain's party received him peremptorily at first; Obama was, uh, greeted as a liberator. Obama swiftly made himself into the Establishment candidate, and McCain swiftly descended into madness and dissipation, improving his standing markedly among Republican die-hards. Obama's vision of "hope and change" is to "restore America's standing in the world," i.e., to travel back in time to the late-90s Bill-Clinton boom-time-bombs-away society. McCain, I don't know, has an extraordinary collection of scars to which he refers anytime he feels the need to prove something. His support consists of the butt-end of Kulturkampf vets, Christian moralists, Muslim-haters, and racists. That must be ennobling. Although he's a monster, I almost hate to see him go out like this. You are supposed to sell your soul, not your dignity. Triumphant liberals meanwhile can barely restrain their gloating, and what's most interesting about the Democrats and their partisans is how the corruptions of power have infected them even prior to officially acquiring it.
Friday, October 31, 2008
Machaivels
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
Of course, everyone with a functioning cerebral cortex knows that the only real "change" The Chosen One's administration is interested in is a postal Change of Address form. That means a lot of Democratic party pwoggie-bloggies like Ko$, Digby, ad vomitum are going to be clocking over time excusing the crimes their "mo'betta dems" are all but certain to commit, probably within nanoseconds of taking office.
A horrible reality condemning thousands around the world to violent deaths? Sure. But the pwoggie blogtards will almost certainly be a comedy gold mine for cutting-edge humorists like, oh, David Letterman...
The Top 10 Excuses Pwoggies will make for their Republicrat masters in 2009.
10 "Mo'betta Dems" - not so betta, akshully.
9 CEOs tired of pulling strings - taking naps.
8 Can't get bills passed until we have 100 senate seats.
7 Lobbyists refusing to write legislation for congresspeople without 25% advance on projected royalties.
6 The dog at our legislation.
5 Previous administraion stole bathroom keys - senators have to go use toilets at the Smithsonian.
4 President Obama filled White House swimming pool with left over corporate campaign money and is too busy doing cannonballs to sign legislation.
3 Nancy says it's "off the table."
2 Republicans are blocking vital legislation by making mean faces at Harry Reid.
1 IT'S RALPH NADER'S FAULT!
"Obama took the more traditional track of motivating "the base," in this case, lying relentlessly and transparently, if soaringly, to soi-disant anti-war Democrats and eking out a primary victory over the truly awful Hillary Clinton by running a moderately more effective campaign to turn out primary voters in the urban centers of large states.
But the Clintonistas told me he won by bullying peoples in caucuses in states like Iowa and Idaho...
If the Clinton years are any indicator, liberals aren't going to make excuses for an Obama administration so much as they'll happily move to the right to accommodate the new party line. It didn't take long for "welfare reform" to change from an evil threatened by Reaganites and kept at bay by Democrats to a proud accomplishment of the Clinton administration; nor did it take long for the Netroots to conveniently drop warrantless wiretapping from its list of Bush administration offenses, once it was clear Obama and Bush saw eye to eye on the subject. You can already see liberal foreign policy types aping their neocon counterparts when it comes to Afghanistan and Pakistan, and Matt Yglesias has even taken a couple stabs at trying to reclaim Petraeus and the Surge for liberalism now that "precipitous withdrawal" is no longer in vogue. Critics on the left will continue to be dismissed as fringe extremists, unworthy of the attention liberals lavish on the likes of Jonah Goldberg, while the Democratic Party lurches further to the right.
Really, referring to the vile political operatives of the Right as "Machaivels" is an insult to the memory of Niccolo Machiavelli, Florentine patriot and politician, humanist and author of The Prince, the Discourses on Livy,, and Mandragora.
His ideas on Realpolitik have noting in kind with his hope for a political leader (like Cesare Borgia)who would end the immoral hold of the Pope and Italy's foreign rulers...
KKKarl Rove is more Himmleresque, anyway..
Dazzle us with more of your encyclopaedic wit, MR bill. This is amusing.
I actually was in a college production of Mandragora. And my kids and coworkers are tired of hearing stuff like the above. Construction guys are just not into the humanities, as a group.
Blogs are my outlet.
The moving of goal posts has started already - pwoggles are being advised by their blogleiters to have lowered expectations, as many of the new, improved, hugealicious majority of Dems will be "Blue Dogs," and thus not as pwogwessive as desirable. So the NEXT election is actually the most importantest ever, since we need a supermajority of REAL Democrats, etc., etc. ad infinitum.
Hey, I'm an Episcopalian! You must be absolutely thrilled that 33.333...% of the Merkin Piscopos read your blog.
(And I only know one other, but she's afraid of computers. Still an anarcho-syndicalist, tho', so she'd probably dig it.)
If no one else wants to elaborate, I give the word to Antonio Gramsci, who had this to say about Old Nick:
It must, however, be noted that the way in which Machiavelli posed the problem of politics (i.e. the assertion implicit in his writing that politics is an autonomous activity, with its own principles and laws distinct from those of morality and religion – a proposition with far-reaching philosophical consequences, since it implicitly introduces a new conception of morality and religion, a new world-view) is still questioned and rejected even today, and has not yet succeeded in becoming "common sense". What does that mean? Does it mean only that the intellectual and moral revolution whose elements are to be found embryonically in Machiavelli's thought has not yet taken place, has not become the public and manifest form of the national culture? Or does it simply have a current political significance; does it serve to indicate the gulf which exists between rulers and ruled, to indicate that there exist two cultures – that of the rulers and that of the ruled – and that the ruling class like the Church has its own attitude towards the common people, dictated by the necessity on the one hand of not becoming detached form them, and on the other of keeping them convinced that Machiavelli is nothing other than the devil incarnate?
...
One may therefore suppose that Machiavelli had in mind "those who are not in the know", and that it was they whom he intended to educate politically. This was no negative political education – of tyrant-haters – as Foscolo seems to have understood it; but a positive education – of those who have to recognise certain means as necessary, even if they are the means of tyrants, because they desire certain ends.
You really think Hillary is truly awful? I'm not gay, but if I were, I think I'd enjoy hanging out with her just for the psycho-sexual frisson; in other words, pretty good fag-hag, no? But I bow to superior discernment in these matters....
Speaking of voyeurism, it would be cool to see Barack and Hillary in bed together, don't you think? That would be a pair to draw to! And then we would have a true and genuine political education. Yes, to see our leaders fucking: then would the structures of power come clear!
Of course, that's just my vicarious huge crush on Hillary speaking, and I admit it. I pant for pantsuits, what can I say?
Post a Comment