When people talk about "criminalizing policy differences", there's a crucial, question-begging assumption, namely: that no one actually broke the law.When liberals talk about "holding the Bush administration to account" and other colorful varieties of that species of songbird, there's a crucial, question-begging assumption, namely that "the Presidency is a public trust, not a license for criminality." Well, if you just learn to think of him a sovereign instead of a citizen. What was that delightful phrase of the early Roman emperors? Primus inter pares? Or of our own scowling would-be Augustus: if the President does it, it's not illegal.
-Hilzoy at the Washington Monthly
I don't mean to be a killjoy, but the wagon train has long since rolled West on the circumscribed presidency. The train has left the station. The ship has sailed. The toothpaste has left the tube. If it comforts them, Democratic partisans can believe that their glorious leader "ended torture as one of his first acts in office," but the more realistic reading is that he codified a public policy whereby the United States tortures prisoners in extremis, during hot warfare or following terrorist attacks, but will not go all France-in-Algeria every time it commits resources to this or that colonial war around the world. The yet more realistic reading is that the United States returns to the status quo ante of keeping its torture private--distant Bagram the obvious counterpart to nearby Guantanamo and all that.
In any case, just the other day the radio told me that the first gang of US soldiers was transferred directly from Iraq to Afghanistan. Do not pass GO. Do not collect $200.
91 comments:
"In any case, just the other day the radio told me that the first gang of US soldiers was transferred directly from Iraq to Afghanistan. Do not pass GO. Do not collect $200. "
See, there you go again, being all "flag waving patriot." Why don't you care about the Iraqis and the Afganas..ah..shit...whateverians. This is just like that time when you said that Americans are the MOST exceptionalist. :P
And the beat down goes on.
I don't mean to be a killjoy, but the wagon train has long since rolled West on the circumscribed presidency.Yeah. 1998 is ancient history.
Leaving that aside, what's your point? Do you think Hilzoy and the rest of us should just accept that our government codified a system of torture? Do you think it's wrong to try to hold someone beside Lynndie England accountable?
ChrisWWW thrusts his fists against the posts and still insists he sees the ghosts
Leaving that aside, what's your point? Do you think Hilzoy and the rest of us should just accept that our government codified a system of torture? Do you think it's wrong to try to hold someone beside Lynndie England accountable?Stop being a fucking patsy. Patsy.
I find that liberals love this word, codified. They love it like the eighties loved shoulder pads. It feels substantive to them. They remind me of the religious types who seem to believe that everyone was just murdering everyone and not an ass went uncoveted until Yaweh gave Moses the writ.
Do you think Hilzoy and the rest of us should just accept that our government codified a system of torture? isn't that, um, what you're doing here? TYPE HARDER IT HURTS MORE.
To paraphrase, the problem is that they're doing it, not that they admitted it. Secret sadism isn't, strictly speaking, any sort of improvement whatsoever on sadism proudly displayed.
Well said.
The train has left the station. The ship has sailed. The toothpaste has left the tube.the goddamn plane has crashed into the mountain!!
Yeah, well, we liberals are discriminating in our torture, and we get no props for that? Sheez. I mean it's a fine line between political expediency and pure unadulterated evil, ya' know. If you tell me you've found it, I shall laugh heartily.
Ha...Ha...Ha, etc.
I'm all for prosecuting any Democrat that orders torture, or who is told about it and does nothing. You know why that is? Because I'm opposed to torture on principle. It's the same reason I oppose our continued military occupation of both Iraq and Afghanistan.
I assume, like most intelligent and compassionate human beings, you oppose torture, so I am a left wondering what your beef with "liberals" is when they oppose the same thing. Again, I'm left assuming you require some absurd level of purity before you'll ally yourself with anyone else.
Peace on Earth. Purity of Essence.
why ally?
Montag,
To produce Change through united Hope, or something like that :-)
...you require some absurd level of purity before you'll ally yourself with anyone else.There's another word pwoggie-bloggies are in love with. They think it lets them off the hook for being such pathetic lesser evil fucktards. Or, as one of Chris' friends recently put it: "Pure pure pure purity pure pure pure pure!"
fucking Nazis. nothing changes.
I'm all for prosecuting any Democrat that orders torture, or who is told about it and does nothing.So that would be, what, all of them? Or do you have a particularly low bar for "doing something"?
Seriously, ChrisWWW, prosecuting "any Democrat that orders torture, or who is told about it and does nothing" would involve jailing, at a minimum, most of the Clinton administration, including and especially Bill Clinton, Al Gore, Madeleine Albright, Richard Clarke, and the current Secretary of State. And reaching back further, there's Jimmy Carter with his hearty support of torture and terror in Afghanistan and Latin America. Now, I'm down with locking up all of them for the rest of their miserable lives, but I get the impression that Hilzoy at least gets a bit squeamish when it's Democrats ordering the torturing - see, for instance, her defense of extraordinary rendition a couple months ago, once it became clear that Obama was going to keep using extraordinary rendition.
I assume, like most intelligent and compassionate human beings, you oppose torture...
Sorry, but I think you're giving IOZ too much credit here. His latest mania seems to be attacking people who oppose torture, so I'm just going to employ Occam's Razor and conclude that he's objectively pro-torture.
It's the most logical explanation, anyway.
His latest mania seems to be attacking people who oppose torture, so I'm just going to employ Occam's Razor and conclude that he's objectively pro-torture.An oldie but a goodie! "You're attacking people who oppose Saddam Hussein, therefore I'm going to conclude that you're objectively pro-Saddam."
There's another word pwoggie-bloggies are in love with. They think it lets them off the hook for being such pathetic lesser evil fucktards.Promoting change within the system requires temporary acceptance of some of the system's evils. Especially when they are cheered on by a solid percentage of the electorate. If liberals force Obama to buck that part of the electorate and leave Iraq and Afghanistan, I'll consider that a net benefit for humanity even if the CIA continues to turn over prisoners to be tortured by the Egyptians or whoever. But that's not to say Obama shouldn't be prosecuted if that is in fact what he's ordered.
prosecuting "any Democrat that orders torture, or who is told about it and does nothing" would involve jailing, at a minimum, most of the Clinton administration, including and especially Bill Clinton, Al Gore, Madeleine Albright, Richard Clarke, and the current Secretary of StateIf there's enough proof to do it, then why not?
see, for instance, [Digby's] defense of extraordinary rendition a couple months ago, She seems opposed to that practice here: http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2009/04/pragmatic-princples-by-digby-greenwald.html
ChrissWWW:
If there's enough proof to do it, then why not?Herein lies the rubb, ain't it?
I mean, in 1943 there was not enough proof that the Katyn corpses were the doing of Joseph Djugashvili.
I posit that "Enough Proof" of (donk or gop) fedgov criminality will have to wait for the arrival of flying Sus Scrofae.
I posit that "Enough Proof" of (donk or gop) fedgov criminality will have to wait for the arrival of flying Sus Scrofae.You living under a rock? Bush & Cheney politely wrote their torture techniques down, then bragged about them on TV.
Promoting change within the systemthis is what IOZ and a lot of the commentators here have been talking about, and why you'll find it hard to get folks here to ally: working "within the system" validates the system.
for example unionizing wal-mart (i think SteveB wants to do this) sounds like a great idea to improve the lives of american workers, but would do so on the backs of the sweatshop laborers who make the cut-rate products they sell, the local business owners who get undercut on price, the pollution of waterways due to runoff from the acres of pavement and rooftop each store requires, and so on.
the system is what it is. i can't begrudge anyone trying to get their piece of the action, but it's all still imperial plunder.
that's kind of a tangent away from the torture issue, i know. but everyone who has held national political power in this country since the start of the cold war has torture blood on their hands. hang them all.
good luck with that, by the way.
Promoting change within the system requires temporary acceptance of some of the system's evils. so you're a gymnast?
what makes you think you can do any better?
what makes you think your results will be different?
why, instead of making peace with the establishment, accepting it for what it is, understanding what in fact it is (evil), and going on about your life, helping out where and when you actually can, do you choose to assume the responsibility of all of us to make it really work out after all?
when will this need to make the world right dwindle to but a candleflame? you should probably spend the fire of your obvious youth getting laid. or maybe this is all a part of that, as you seek to anoint us with the jism of your wisdom.
do you want us to eat you and your aloe-vera sensitive skin tissue belief about the bad system, that just needs the right people (or is the system itself that needs changing? I forget what the problem is now a days) alive, or would you prefer the cold press of time and the Obama administration to do that work for us? what, in other words, are you doing here?
Since the start of the COLD WAR? Jeeez louise, Montag, this country is built on torture and genocide from the beginning. But, of course we all know that.
We are ALL GUILTY. Just for existing we are GUILTY. Blawg!
working "within the system" validates the system. Well, if you're not interested in working within the system, and you're too lazy/cowardly to start a revolution, then you're nothing but a whiner. Right?
why, instead of making peace with the establishment, accepting it for what it is, understanding what in fact it is (evil), and going on about your life, helping out where and when you actually can, do you choose to assume the responsibility of all of us to make it really work out after all?Maybe I'm wrong, but I believe the world, for all its problems, is a better place today than it was 50 years ago, or a thousand. I don't think it just turned out that way by accident; people worked and sacrificed to that end.
what, in other words, are you doing here?No, the question is, what are you doing here? If everyone and everything around you is so damned evil that it can't be changed and no one should try, then why bother blogging/bitching about it?
touche.
So, is Mr. Fun more ethical because he's completely apathetic or is ChrisWWW more ethical because he's completely deluded? Strap on yer helmets and get ready to wrestle...
if you're not interested in working within the system, and you're too lazy/cowardly to start a revolution, then you're nothing but a whiner. Right?it's less that i'm not interested, than that it's not the way the system works. the system is designed to perpetuate the status quo, to reinforce existing power structures, while letting the little people feel like they have some amount of control so they don't get too riled up.
as for the "cowardly" charge: have you seen how many machine guns the motherfuckers have? there's only, like, 10 or 15 of us. shortest. revolution. evar.
as for the "lazy" charge: why does lazy get such a bad rap, anyways?
for example unionizing wal-mart (i think SteveB wants to do this) sounds like a great idea to improve the lives of american workers, but would do so on the backs of the sweatshop laborers who make the cut-rate products they sell, the local business owners who get undercut on price, the pollution of waterways due to runoff from the acres of pavement and rooftop each store requires, and so on.
Sure, and why oppose sweatshop labor when we know those same products, made in sweatshops or not, are going to be sold by exploited non-union retail workers? And why oppose the environmental damage done by each store, when the store itself is a venue for the sale of sweatshop products by exploited retail workers?
Honestly, if we can't solve all of the world's problems all at once, why even bother?
The idea that each and every human being bears individual responsibility for Change, that the most basic moral precept is to either "make the system better" or "start a revolution," is dumb. Apathy gets tossed around by changeites as if it were intrinsically pejorative. Is it?
the system is designed to perpetuate the status quo, to reinforce existing power structures, while letting the little people feel like they have some amount of control so they don't get too riled up.It's true the system perpetuates the status quo... hell that's definitional. But it does that by making people think they can't change it (like you), or making them comfortable enough not to question it. But it's clearly not entirely true that system cant change, because it has. When our country was founded, black people were slaves, women couldn't vote and corporations weren't considered legal super persons.
Honestly, if we can't solve all of the world's problems all at once, why even bother?<--- QFT
Apathy gets tossed around by changeites as if it were intrinsically pejorative. Is it?
But you're not being apathetic. You're still bothering to complain about people are being activists, without offering even a skeletal idea of what you'd have them do differently.
If you were truly apathetic, you'd be following Fundamental's advice and spend your energy elsewhere, like "getting laid".
dude, read this.
and let me ask again, what are you doing here? or rather, what do you *think* you are doing here?
besides peeing on the rug.
you've basically happened upon a den of blawg. not much good can come from us. we're just pointing out the obvious. like you sitting in your chair, arguing with us, not changing a damn thing.
oh wow. I just saw a light flicker in some distant corner of my cube farm, can you come and change it for me?
I think ChrisWWW believes that we are all fellow travelers, except that we have not received the unrealized truth. And, as soon as he comes and tells us what it is, we'll all march right behind him and become the new Civil Service of the The Great Progressive Revolution.
He's like those Jehovah's Witnesses who explain their cockamamie spiel, and when you turn away they complain that you're being deliberately obstinate because they've just told you the words from the mouth of Gawd Himself and you're just fucking with the JWs when you should be getting with the program.
ChrisWWW is looking for converts - either that, or martyrdom. This explains why he keeps hanging around. We're too lazy to martyr people around here; let him find a right wing message board for that.
re: apathy.
Apathy gets tossed around by changeites as if it were intrinsically pejorative. Is it?
OK, you're apathetic. Nothing wrong with that. But, if that's the case, why is there anything on this website except porn and recipes?
Obviously, you care enough about "Change" to attack the people who are trying to make it happen. Why?
ChrisWWW is looking for converts - either that, or martyrdom.
Here's another possibility you haven't considered: He's looking for an intelligent conversation with some people who disagree with him (and not finding it.) Because talking/arguing about politics can help pass the time while we're working/waiting for the revolution.
I know this is hard to believe, but some of us, when we encounter people whose views differ from our own, think, "Hmmmm... what's up with that? Maybe I'll ask them some probing questions and try to figure out where they're coming from!" Takes more effort than calling people "fucktard", but it can be amusing, nonetheless.
Poor conversationalists invariably accuse their betters of a lack of substance, and demand dreariness, which they call "intelligent" or "mature."
I know this is hard to believe, but some of us, when we encounter people whose views differ from our own, think, "Hmmmm... what's up with that? Maybe I'll ask them some probing questions and try to figure out where they're coming from!" Takes more effort than calling people "fucktard", but it can be amusing, nonetheless.would that it were so. he's been here for 2 days and already blown his Change wad all over the rug. it's kind of gross. clearly he doesn't have much resolve, unless you call futility resolve.
where's your fortitude, old chap? give it a real go. SHOW US WHAT YOU'RE MADE OF.
But you're not being apathetic. You're still bothering to complain about people are being activists, without offering even a skeletal idea of what you'd have them do differently.What you and the other changlings don't seem to grasp is that significant change has not and will not occur through electoral politics. The system only changes when the wealthy feel that their grasp on power, or at least their bottom line, is under threat. Actions that would have more dramatic effects would involve threatening commerce and the bottom line - sit down strikes, shutting down highways, etc. Of course such direct actions carry the risk of incarceration or worse, and most people aren't angry enough to go that far. Raising awareness of the crimes of the ruling class is a necessary step, but asking people to channel their political energy through the electoral system is pretty counter-productive.
Yo fer realz, why is it that "intelligent conversation" always means heads nodding in unison to some jerkoff doing a "This I Believe" number. Can't I just text a vote from my Verizon mobile?
Well, you really have to expect this kind of cultish behavior from the dumbass "change from within" new age pwoggie-bloggie crowd. After all, they're under the oh-so-smug impression that Wilson just saw the light one day and signed the 19th amendment out of the goodness of his progressive heart. If they believe that shit they'll believe in any fucking stupid thing.
Actions that would have more dramatic effects would involve threatening commerce and the bottom line - sit down strikes, shutting down highways, etc.
Too bad you won't find any support for that here, either.
Yo fer realz, why is it that "intelligent conversation" always means heads nodding in unison to some jerkoff doing a "This I Believe" number.
Who said anything about unison? We're having an argument here. And the dominant assumption around these parts is that if you're talking to someone you disagree with, you must be trying to win converts. What's wrong with talking to someone you disagree with because you're trying to understand what they think?
imagine a water cooler, right
---------------------->here.
Either spit your speak or sit there and grit your teeth
Either drop your pants or paint your wagon, pigrim.
Too bad you won't find any support for that here, either.Aux barricades! Listen, brother, if I see y'all barreling down Butler Street in the direction of downtown pitchforks raised and torches ablaze, I will surely tie a yellow ribbon to my tree.
I would like to know who SteveB and his pal ChrisWhyWeWhy are "arguing" with. anyone?
they're under the oh-so-smug impression that Wilson just saw the light one day and signed the 19th amendment out of the goodness of his progressive heart.
No, there was a social movement, they were called Suffragists, and if you had been alive then, you would have been calling them pwoggie fucktards.
I thought that was Bowie?
DEBATE
resolved, that IOZ' blogging apathetically precludes him actually being apathetic, and is tantamount to complaining about others being activists.
arguing the affirmative: SteveB and ChrisWWW
arguing the negative: ... anyone?
someone call the cambridge forum we got a hot one here.
No, there was a social movement, they were called Suffragists
and today, voting is meaningless. that's progress!
And the suffragists were good faithful progressive Democrats who worked within the system and hoped for change and that's how women got the vote and everyone lived happily ever after the end.
I said THE END!
{stamps little foot}
WAAAAAAAAAH!!!!
It's well know that Steve's great grandfather felt so strongly about the suffragist cause that he once actually wrote something about it on a scrap of paper and showed it to four people! WOW!
we are the counter-revolutionary disarming brigade, and you have stumbled. . .or stubbled. . .into our headquarterz. we are the knights that say "meh."
whaddyawanwidus?
Sorry, I won't be able to make it to the debate you're arranging through the Oxford Union, or the cambridge forum, or whatever, but you have my permission to use the facsimile of me that Mr. Smithee has oh-so-carefully constructed out of straw.
Actually, he just wrote a comment about suffrage on the back of a recipe for lambs head stew that was inexplicably posted up on the notice board at the general store. But, hey, it's the thought that counts!
Question. as for the "lazy" charge: why does lazy get such a bad rap, anyways?Ans. Jealousy. Lazy people are more enlightened so the riff raff resent them. Or maybe the riff raff resents them--it depends on whether riff raff is singular or plural--I'm too lazy to find out.
PS. Are you sure 'anyways' has an s?
Mr. Fun: we are the knights that say "meh."
i like that.
Anon 6:40 - i just add the s at the end of anyways for fun.
I think "resigned" might be a better word than "apathetic" or "lazy" here. Obviously the people here care enough to keep coming back and commenting. It could be argued that people here care MORE about the important things cuz they're less willing to shrug off the atrocities "activists" twist themselves in pretzels to justify in the name of Hope or Working Within the System or whatever.
This place is kind of a support group for those who know how fucked up things are and who know how unable they are to stop any of it, or fuck, even convince their friends that shit SHOULD be stopped. Probably every "apathetic" cynic here used to be sanguine about change and improvement until they learned better.
My name is Druff and I'm disillusioned. "Hi, Druff."
This place is kind of a support group for those who know how fucked up things are and who know how unable they are to stop any of it, or fuck, even convince their friends that shit SHOULD be stopped. Probably every "apathetic" cynic here used to be sanguine about change and improvement until they learned better.
Well, that sounds reasonable enough. I'll try to be more understanding in the future.
I think there is presumption in thinking we can -- or should -- "change things" merely because they require it.
I'm not saying it isn't important that people try; I'm saying there is sufficient hazard in the task to beg humility on our part.
Mature authority is typically challenged by some developing kind; suffice it to say, the former is almost always better understood than the latter -- and that is probably not saying much.
I think IOZ admirably draws attention to this danger, which is all too easily overlooked when the focus predictably turns to what others are doing.
Ideally, we should judge behavior by a single standard, and let the chips fall where they may.
oh oh oh me too...i wanna play!!!
we are the counter-revolutionary disarming brigade, and you have stumbled. . .or stubbled. . .into our headquarterz. we are the knights that say "meh."who is we and who are the revolutionary brigade? is this anything like hogan's heroes?
Like Lady MacBeth, my hands can never be clean. Rather than scrubbing them, I'd just as soon put them to use by, I don't know, masturbating.
No, the question is, what are you doing here? If everyone and everything around you is so damned evil that it can't be changed and no one should try, then why bother blogging/bitching about it?Well, personally, I'm changing the system from within in the best way I know how - by slacking off at work and charging it to corporate clients. I'm taking over a thousand bucks a day out of the pockets of major multinationals and putting it into the pockets of the downtrodden and oppressed - specifically, my pockets. Some of it then gets passed on to various charities and NGOs.
What are you doing?
I don't get the self-righteousness, that's what I don't get.
I mean, I honestly don't give a shit whether you work within the system or do... whatever the fuck the alternative would be, but well,
If you vote for Nader people get mad. How DARE you hurt the chances of our Democratic candidate? Don't you know he's the best you're ever going to get? What gives you the right to ask for more you arrogant little shit?
If our system of elections regularly produces results at odds with what the people actually want, then it's pretty much broken. But apparently the solution is just to not run two candidates with similar views and popularity levels, rather then try to fix the system.
And that's fine with me! Maybe it is the better choice. But since when did using broken nasty shit become a high moral calling that gives you the right to yell at everybody who doesn't want to use it?
You aren't a better person because you work within the system. We all work within the system. The fact that you complain about it slightly less doesn't make you a better person.
I'm so so sorry to be the bearer of such bad news.
I was trying to figure out why the trolls were suddenly out in such force and then I remembered: Oh yeah! Spring break.
Holy shit, Mr. Fun, Keynes was right again.
We're having an argument here.An argument is a connected series of statements intended to establish a proposition.
No, it isn't.
You aren't a better person because you work within the system.HERETIC!!! BLASPHEMER!!! You're so purity pure pure pure purity pure pure pure pure pure purity purepurepurepure!!! We democrats a realists and your purity pure pure pure! Pure!
I don't get the self-righteousness, that's what I don't get.Yeah, I don't get that either. Libdems are so condescending when I tell them I voted for Nader (and Cobb, and McKinney). I don't understand how things really work, they've seen the world and comprehend it in all its flaws, and if I'd stop being so damn naive, I'd act as they do.
And then you've got the exact mirror image of that attitude right here in IOZ-land. If you think that people might be able to work together collectively to improve their lot, brace yourself for the self-righteous shitstorm you'll get in return. We're not doing anything, the IOZians say, and that makes us better than you, because "we're not helping to legitimize a corrupt system," or "we're not so arrogant as to assume we know the correct course of action," or some such self-justifying bullshit.
Thing is, I mostly agree with the folks here about electoral politics, which is mostly a rigged game, but the more-cynical-than-thou broad brush gets applied to any attempt to change things for the better, electoral or not. It's like IOZ's minions have so firmly linked "Change" with Obama in their minds, that they assume that anyone who professes an interest in change must be a raving Obamabot.
People are odd, aren't they?
holy shit. SteveB says something practically on point!
We're not doing anything, the IOZians say, and that makes us better than you,
no. maybe the underlying theme is this: 'doing nothing is doing something. and it isn't any less effective than what you're doing.'
who's being self-righteous and building things out of straw, now?
We're not doing anything, the IOZians say, and that makes us better than you.Whoa. Someone page Doc Freud. We've got a live one.
doing nothing is doing something...
Well now, that is profound.
and it isn't any less effective than what you're doing.
At what point do we evaluate effectiveness? Now? A year from now? Ten years from now?
perhaps the effectiveness of working for change through the electoral process can best be gauged when the sun is a cold red dwarf.
If you think that people might be able to work together collectively to improve their lotthis is not the same thing as collectively acting to improve your lot (just to point out the obvious and what i often think the "IOZians" are pointing out to you). every moment you spend here, arguing with the wall, is another moment you are not creating your change. this wasted energy indicates that either you are not convinced you have the correct course of action or you aren't the hercules necessary to push the entire brutish horde in your new proper direction. in either case, you are irrelevant.
"we're not so arrogant as to assume we know the correct course of action," or some such self-justifying bullshit.oh dear lord. i see there are no mirrors in the steveb household.
perhaps the effectiveness of working for change through the electoral process can best be gauged when the sun is a cold red dwarf.
Sigh...Please show me where I've claimed to have any hope for "the electoral process." I thought "electoral politics, which is mostly a rigged game" was clear enough, but maybe that "mostly" is troubling you.
every moment you spend here, arguing with the wall, is another moment you are not creating your change.
I know, if I claim to have any interest in social change, and I don't spend every waking moment working towards that end, I'm a hypocrite.
this wasted energy indicates that either you are not convinced you have the correct course of action
Well, I'm never convinced I have the correct course of action. I suppose that makes me different from you.
in either case, you are irrelevant.
Yes, you're probably right about that. Certainly, anything I do here is irrelevant. I come here just to pass the odd moment, and because I'm argumentative by nature (or so people have told me). I'm not hoping to win converts, or to impress anyone. Is that modest enough for you?
Pwoggie fucktard.
Actually, SteveB's pretty right on the money. Most of the folks round these parts are just throwing spitballs at the wall and yelling at anyone with an optimistic point-of-view to shut the fuck up, all cooler-than-thou like.
There have, in fact, been gains made over the decades, usually by folks who were beaten or shot at. Electoral politics (at least those not on a local scale) is basically a dead-end for making positive change, though small gains might be made.
If I'm reading SteveB right, he's just pointing this out, more or less. All the disillusioned joes around here get their feathers ruffled like a bunch of teenage boys when someone comes along and makes this case.
Guys, I know this blawg is yer hangout and all, but it's good to open a window and air the room out a bit from time to time.
Damn Dunc gets 1000 bucks a day?! He is oppressed. How on earth does he manage?
hey and since when are people with "the right positive political outlook" only allowed to spit their speak and correct people? SteveB says Yay! We Can Do It! and most here say Nay! Here's How You're Not Doing It!
what's so hard to understand? SteveB just needs to get better at excoriating this gaggle of malcontents. he gets the brunt of the invective around here because he's basically the only game in town. and for that we loves him? meh.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_Inventer
All the disillusioned joes around here get their feathers ruffled like a bunch of teenage boys when someone comes along and makes this case."Their feathers ruffled like a bunch of teenage boys"? Clearly I am choosing the wrong porn sites.
I thought you'd dig that one, IOZ.
I honestly don't see a lot of feathers getting ruffled here. (But then, I am not a teenage boy). I am just having fun by poking at the earnest.
I actually have taken an activist position here numerous times, Steve. I don't know; maybe it's your style?
Either way, the fact that we're disagreeing only throws into starker relief the fact that the powerful can agree on maintaining their privileges. Well, peasants will keep running their mouths.
That said, I kinda agree with you here. One of IOZ's earlier comments rubbed me the wrong way--what was it, about holding everyone accountable for change being dumb? Sure, we've all got varying degrees of power and influence, but I do think that Americans, in general, have it easy. We have an entire political process that's actually pretty easy, relatively speaking, to manipulate. And fuck, nobody's happy! And what's more, we have created a network of secret prisons and slaughtered a hundred thousand. And I do blame us. I do think that we deserve credit for this. We used 9/11 as an excuse to ramp up our tradition of not caring and just threw ourselves in domesticity and material comfort and we ignored the matter of power that allows you to enjoy such comforts and permits you a degree of freedom. Sorry to sound like a Prussian, but we really did go soft, and not in the way the talking heads would have us think.
But I'm not going to blame anyone for losing hope, honestly. And throwing yourself into family, gardening, drug use, whatever? I don't blame you, because during hard times those comforts can really sustain you.
Anyway, I drone on. Let's get back to the straw man competition, where we can project all our enmities on each other and not listen to a goddamn word anyone's saying.
I just drew the most bitchin' circle-A anarchy symbol you ever did see on my skateboard. Suck on that, Steviebabywhaawhaa!
We should all drink more beer, generally.
There's no harm in being generous toward each other, either.
Post a Comment