Tuesday, October 19, 2010

The Possibility of an Omnipotent God Creating an Obstacle that He Cannot Remove



Well, I've spent all morning availing myself of the many mechanisms of the modern state in order to constrain and delimit the power of the modern state, and I've got to say, I am really excited about the possibilities of it possibly working to make measurable improvements in my own life. I completely recant, and I urge you to support primary challenges and to swallow your purist, ideological objections and vote Democrat this November, because even though Obama hasn't lived up to all his promises and the Democratic party has largely failed to deliver a better and more human society, we cannot risk putting people in power who would start wars in Pakistan and Yemen, extend federal drug laws, and allow massive institutions of corporate finance to enrich themselves via endemic programs of ubiquitous theft.

93 comments:

Anonymous said...

ready for your atrios link?

MikeAdamson said...

The least bad choice...sad but true.

mextremist said...

"we cannot risk putting people in power who would start wars in Pakistan and Yemen, extend federal drug laws, and allow massive institutions of corporate finance to enrich themselves via endemic programs of ubiquitous theft."

i see what you did there...

APPROVE NOTHING, my fellow jacobins!

Montag said...

don't run away from this, Dude! goddamnit, this affects all of us!

Montag said...

also, since when do Gitmo detainees get to ride around in sedan charis?

Anonymous said...

"The state is the divine idea as it exists on earth." -Hegel

What makes you think that things don't usually contain their opposites? (For example, you and Digby make more sense as a pair than either of you do individually.) The idea of state power that can only be constrained by state power arguably applies to all dominant social modes.

What you treat as an invalidating characteristic (just as Marx did, though he called it the "contradictions of capitalism") may just be the way of the world. I do agree with you in one limited sense: when the dominant model changes, it is the contradictions that will inspire the new synthesis. But that synthesis will be equally contradictory.

You oppositional defiant types really need to keep you some Hegel on the toilet.

Inkberrow said...

"...extend federal drug laws...."? In this connection, anyway, Eric Holder is the greater of two evils. There's no one more dangerous to individual liberties across the board than a powerful mod-prog who proudly announces common cause with Republicans in the War on Drugs. Meanwhile, if his polls numbers continue to languish into 2011 and 2012, Obama will himself order offensives in Waziristan and/or Yemen. His corporatist/syndicalist connections are already well-established.

Anonymous said...

Wait a second, IOZ.

Are you being sarcastic?

Professor Coldheart said...

Damn straight, IOZ. Because that's what Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and Russ Feingold bring to the D.C. establishment - the Hegelian dialectic.

(Can I save your comment in amber for the next time someone calls me a "purist"?)

Anonymous said...

another bottom

Thoreau said...

Monsieur IOZ, you are just a loser outsider with no chance of effecting any societal change or the implementation of your political platform.

Also, anti-state folks like yourself are Part Of The Problem and the real reason why Team Blue will lose.

So, it's all your fault, and you have no power. Got it?

George Jones said...

I know someone who killed someone once and didn't care. Therefore, The State.

LP Steve said...

The State, and some great tunes, e.g., "Folsom Prison Blues."

Inkberrow said...

Duh on me. Another tune---"Anarchy In The Soiree". No dogsbody.....

Anonymous said...

we cannot risk putting people in power who would start wars in Pakistan and Yemen, extend federal drug laws, and allow massive institutions of corporate finance to enrich themselves via endemic programs of ubiquitous theft.

Sarcasm noted. But this somewhat sidesteps the crux of the progressive argument, which is that, while Democrats are disappointingly similar to Republicans in the ways you've listed, they're marginally dissimilar in other ways, and that no matter how depressingly small these positive differences may be, it still represents change in a positive, albeit minimal, direction. Multiply that by a million years or so and you've got Progressive Utopia, man! My beef, however, is not against the snail's pace at which it would take to get there, but that in many ways there is fucking disturbing, and in other ways so full of contradictions of logic as to render its positive attributes unattainable.

Lysander said...

Call me crazy, but I'm kind of looking forward to an openly militarist passionately aggressive GOP to lead us to total destruction using the direct rather than the scenic rout.

It's the only way the public can figure it out. Now it's like Clark Kent with his eye glasses on. I mean, how can they not know that's Superman?

Especially since Lois Lane must have been blowing "both" of them.

Professor Coldheart said...

Call me crazy, but I'm kind of looking forward to an openly militarist passionately aggressive GOP to lead us to total destruction using the direct rather than the scenic rout.

The "We're All Bastards; Let's Act Like It" Party? Sign me up.

davidly said...

It's not that I don't care about innocent foreigners and all, it's just that my most immediate fears are more important.

Anonymous said...

All I can say is that this subject title seems strangely apt for our situation.

Justin said...

Thank you, Ioz. You have no idea how many lives you saved with this blog post. It probably runs into the thousands.

NutellaonToast said...

Some people vote Democrat despite that fact that i makes no difference.

Other people blawg for the same reason.

Both consider themselves superior, but have jack shit to show for it.

WEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

IOZ said...

All IN!

zencomix said...

This is the point in the cartoon where Bugs Bunny gets dressed up in drag, and Yosemite Sam tries courting him. Meanwhile, Peter Griffin says "Heh, he said "Swallow your purist,"heh heh."

Anonymous said...

Only one solution: Dennis Kucinich and his lovely wife. Like he said. What's wrong with a Department of Peace?

Paul Alexander said...

Stop bringing up all the killing and locking up people in cages for having an inert substance that somebody buys from them willingly! Those things will never change! We need to focus on immediate and attainable goals, like having hearings convened on the dangers of children toys and steroids in baseball. Can you imagine if the Republicans get control of the Congress? The Democrats won't be able to hold any hearings!

Happy Jack said...

If the Democrats are promising to give up US sovereignty to the UN, I'm in. Cuz, ya know, the State can be kept in check if sociopaths with foreign accents slap some law on our sociopaths.

Anonymous said...

Stamping your little feet and refusing to participate isn't going to make the state wither away. In fact, it just makes it easier for those in charge to do whatever they want. When the US empire crashes, it will do so on its own time, and will probably be replaced by another powerful nation or group of nations. We all agree on this, yes?

Therefore, given the practical uselessness of political abstention, the main argument for not participating is the feeling of moral purity it gives you, hence the (apparently earnest) comments every time this topic comes up here about having blood on your hands, being responsible for whatever the president does in your name, etc.

Problem being, your consumer habits have much more to do with prolonging all the terrible things you pompous douches profess to care about. A person who votes Democratic every four years in the hope of making a tiny difference domestically for a small group of people has much less to answer for than all you fatass rich suburban yuppies do for all the money you regularly spend. If you're so worried about blood on your hands, quit driving your SUV rather than walk a hundred yards to Starbucks where you can rail on the internet about how radical your politics are.

Anonymous said...

"When the US empire crashes, it will do so on its own time, and will probably be replaced by another powerful nation or group of nations. We all agree on this, yes?"

If it's going to crumble on its own, then voting is as useless as not voting.

Therefore, given the practical uselessness of political participation, the main argument for participating is the feeling of moral purity it gives you, hence the (apparently earnest) comments every time this topic comes up here about having BLAWG!

mp said...

Man, everybody else is driving an SUV? How long do I have to comment here to get mine, IOZ?

Meanwhile, 5:34, feel good about yourself for rocking the Democratic vote, until you start bitching about the future Mr. Hopey-Change's betrayal.

stras said...

IOZ, don't be such a whiny little bitch.

la Rana said...

Um, anon, uh, well, uh, IOZ lives in a city, walks to work, and bakes his own bread. I live in a different city, take the metro to work, and bake my own bread. And neither of us expects the state to wither away in our lifetimes.

So while I can't speak for everyone here, yours may be the most obtuse jeremiad in a long and cherished history of "you think you're all better than me but nuh-uh!" comments on this-a-here blawg. Congrats on being wrong about everything.

Paul Alexander said...

I'll have you know that I drive a Prius, only buy ecologically sound, free trade certified goods from my local co-op and volunteer wiping butts at the local shelter. The wiping butts is in a completely unofficial capacity. So don't tell me I'm not doing anything!

All these voterphiles have yet to point to any specific benefits to voting. And by specific, I mean the results of any recent election of a politician or passage of a proposition that made a discernible difference. I'm not against voting if it makes sense, in fact I'll admit that I sometimes indulge in it myself. But I can't think of a good reason to harangue someone into doing it. Besides, a non-vote is in a very real way a vote against what's on offer and the way elections are currently conducted, whether any voting fanatic wants to deny it or not. Roughly 50% of the electorate usually says no to everyone.

IOZ said...

Can't you read, Paul. It makes a tiny difference! Domestically! For a small group of people!

Like for instance the employees of Goldman Sachs.

Anonymous said...

Besides, a non-vote is in a very real way a vote against what's on offer and the way elections are currently conducted, whether any voting fanatic wants to deny it or not. Roughly 50% of the electorate usually says no to everyone.

Yes. That's what will rein our leaders in - when they realize that no one is paying attention to them anymore. Jesus Christ, how stupid can one man possibly be?

Paul Alexander said...

What, not voting won't rein in the leaders? Are you sure? Okay, well then I was wrong. But you're sure voting will? Okay, I'm on board. Let's get these assholes.

Anonymous said...

Like for instance the employees of Goldman Sachs.

Who are definitely quaking in fear over the threat of you shitpigs staying home and refusing to participate at all in the one institution that theoretically is capable of restraining them because it won't give you a pony right now.

davidly said...

Yes. That's what will rein our leaders in - when they realize that no one is paying attention to them anymore. Jesus Christ, how stupid can one man possibly be?

How stupid? Thinking - after all this time - that voting for them is reigning them in.

Anonymous said...

By the way, Mikhail Bakunin and Nestor Mahkno never said shit about baking bread or riding the fucking Metro. What kind of lame anarchists are you pussies?

Paul Alexander said...

Goldman Sachs is a very good example! I can't imagine what their world would be like if someone hadn't taken the time to vote. I'm softening. I think voting just might be the answer.

davidly said...

Or reining them in, as the case may be.

I think nony 5:34 must have been emboldened by a previous thread to come here and "blow off steam". Non-participation is certainly part of the program; I just didn't realize it came with a yuppie badge.

Anonymous said...

Non-participation is certainly part of the program; I just didn't realize it came with a yuppie badge.

Your lifestyle as a spoiled American is what earns you that. Or are you living off the land and baking your own bread too?

la Rana said...

$20 says anon drives his suv one mile through the suburbs to starbucks every day.

I am not an anarchist.

davidly said...

Unlike you, Nony 7:09, my lifestyle is fairly easy to verify - if you're so inclined. I'll save you the trouble: I don't pay taxes, I ride a bicycle 12 months out of the year, and I have my own baker who bakes fresh daily.

I'm not proud of any of this, but can't help mentioning it, just having been referred to as a spoiled American. You have no idea what you're talking about, shit for brains.

IOZ said...

Is this your only form of identification?

davidly said...

I'd love to have a Ralph's card. They provided Alex Cox with all that generic product.

Montag said...

i for one have never ever contemplated the consequences of american consumerism, nor my family's role in it.

it's pretty bad, huh? but you say voting absolves me of much of this culpability provided i vote Democratic? suh-weeet!

why do people want current company to vote so bad anyway? who do you think we'd end up voting for? how is your crusade furthered if a bunch of internet yahoos turn out and write-in Cairo The Boxer for congress or some shit?

your slip is showing, 5:34.

IOZ said...

I'm voting for that Rent is Too Damn High dude. Karate Chop!

Enron said...

"Yes. That's what will rein our leaders in - when they realize that no one is paying attention to them anymore."
Yes, speak truth to power! Because it really truly gives a shit.

Jim Wetzel said...

"We all agree on this, yes?"

Look, you told Brant, and Brant told me. Yes? Yes?

la Rana said...

I'll vote for anyone with a handlebar mustache.

Montag said...

he's good. and makes a good point about the rent.

Marcus said...

Refusing to pray to for better government won't help. Therefore you must pray for better government.

Or if you're a godbeliever: Refusing to tap dance for better government...

Anonymous said...

it's pretty bad, huh? but you say voting absolves me of much of this culpability provided i vote Democratic? suh-weeet!

why do people want current company to vote so bad anyway?


No, dumbass. First, I'm saying that since you clearly take pride in the supposed moral significance of your principled non-voting, maybe you should concentrate your energies on much more important things, such as your consumer habits. (How convenient and totally believable it is, by the way, that we have all these bike-riding, bread-baking, hemp-wearing, simply-living dumpster-divers among us! We even have a Gerry Spence-wannabe lawyer who spends his weekends freeing people from Uncle Sam's gulag!)

Secondly, I don't personally care if you vote or not. I thought we were just having an argument over principles for the fuck of it. You all think it's monumentally important that we not vote, because contributing the smallest iota of energy to the charade only strengthens and validates it. I think it doesn't matter much either way, but that your reasoning is asinine and childish. As I already said, the whole colossus will come crashing down on its own time. In the meantime, I agree with people like that corporate sellout Obamabot stooge Chomsky who say that sometimes, the trivial differences between the parties can translate into beneficial results for some of the worst off in our society. Some of us feel that's worth our participation in the whole rotten system, because our personal purity doesn't matter.

What's amusing is seeing how utterly goddamn seriously you take yourselves. I would think that people who honestly felt the way you claim to feel would just shrug or yawn incessantly, but goodness, how ferocious y'all get when someone points out that you're just as bad as all the people you love to look down on.

Anonymous said...

Suck it, bitchez.

Mr.Fundamental said...

haha - this is what voting gets you, Lebowski!

stras said...

That list is fucking hilarious. Show me the part under "Conservation" where it says "When a bunch of well-heeled sociopaths sent millions of gallons of viscous, toxic sludge gushing into the Gulf of Mexico, Barack Obama did a single fucking thing about it, other than covering up the crimes of said well-heeled sociopaths."

Dunc said...

Besides, a non-vote is in a very real way a vote against what's on offer

No, sorry, it's not. A non-vote is a non-vote. Anybody who even cares to notice (which no-one is likely to do) will simply assume that you (like the rest of the silent majority) support whatever the fuck it is they would like you to.

Look, it's very simple people: you don't get a say. Vote, don't vote, whatever... It doesn't make any fucking difference either way.

I always find it hilarious that anyone here would imagine that not voting matters any more than voting. You're still imagining that you live in some kind of democracy.

Montag said...

my consumer habits, (which you know nothing of,) aren't the issue here. but, yes, we've learned over time that there is an inordinately high percentage of bicycle commuters in our ranks. we ride for myriad reasons, surely. we just don't claim to be saving the world by doing it.

i couldn't care less if anybody else votes. i have my reasons for not, and sometimes share them when asked.

if you think us folks take ourselves too goddamn seriously, i suggest that you haven't been following along. a frequent refrain here is "it is what it is" read with a shrug. Mr. Fundamental's avatar is Marvin the paranoid android, for fuck's sake.

you have no frame of reference, nonny. you're like a child who wanders in in the middle of a movie and wants to know--

also, i don't drink coffee, but if i did it would come from Dunkin Donuts, not Starbucks. please.

Anonymous said...

58 comments and not a golfer in the bunch. I'd call that a statistical anomaly.

The real Nony.

Professor Coldheart said...

since you clearly take pride in the supposed moral significance of your principled non-voting, maybe you should concentrate your energies on much more important things, such as your consumer habits.

I'm sorry, what? We should redirect all the energy that we've saved by not voting (which takes about 15 minutes with a mail-in ballot) and start taking the bus to work? I ... it ... whuh?

Also, people keep accusing me of being principled and it makes me uncomfortable.

Gridlock said...

It is our most modestly priced receptacle.

LA Confidential Pantload said...

IOZ, you can tell us - this new Anonymous-Principled-Donklecrat is actually your very own sock puppet? I mean he/she/it is almost too good to be true, with the virtual wattles quivering in pwoggie outrage, and the pwoggie pwagmatism of "rough men with votes for Democrats" as opposed to faggy effete anarchists who bake their own bread.

la Rana said...

Listen Don Quixote, IOZ an us all are just responding to persistent pleading that we vote. We are not the proselytizers. We just answered the door. Almost no one here thinks "it's monumentally important that we not vote." You can do battle with yourself without involving us.

As for your description of my real life, your caricature is almost dead on.

Barfunkel said...

I don't know about you, but if I have a vote between being raped by someone who thinks Intelligent Design is valid science, and someone who thinks government can change the Earth's climate, I will pick the person with the smallest penis.

Mr.Fundamental said...

here are some primers for the ninnying nonny's. it's not difficult stuff, really. as always, the mileage is gonna vary.

Paul Alexander said...

When I said that not-voting was a vote in itself, I didn't mean that it has had any actual effect, just that if voting had any real difference it seems that if 50% of the electorate don't partake it would cause alarm and there would be a decided effort to get them back to the booth. It's very strange that the Dems don't feel any real urgent need to try and recruit the "undecided". Could it be that they prefer it this way, where the progressive left has no where else to go and the Democratic leadership realizes this and thus ignores them almost completely, knowing they have their votes locked up regardless of what they do?

I'm sure you could compile a list that sounds as good as those for Obama, and equally as long, of all the "accomplishments" GWB. I really like this accomplishment: 26.Success of the stimulus–how do you illustrate ‘could have been worse’? Well, I guess you could just say that everyone would have starved to death.

Mr.Fundamental said...

Alaya said it best a while ago.

Brandon said...

I have a question for the non-voters. Do y’all feel the same about voting on ballot propositions as you do on candidates for office? Maybe the answer is obvious, but, say, on a prop banning same-sex marriage or decriminalizing marijuana, enough of your basically insignificant votes could preserve some measure of individual liberty over state dominance. What do y’all think about prop voting?

Mr.Fundamental said...

that it's likely the right thing to do (decriminalize drugs), but, whatever - the existing laws are not going to stop anyone that can already buy drugs. laws are silly things. why have them?

Dunc said...

if 50% of the electorate don't partake it would cause alarm and there would be a decided effort to get them back to the booth

I'm very much not convinced that this is true, but assuming it were, the "decided effort to get them back to the booth" is far more likely to involve compulsory voting than "improving" politics. The penalty for serial non-voting would most likely be disenfranchisement, neatly removing the problematic non-voters from the rolls and returning the apparent turnout to "respectable" levels.

Personally, I think that if turnout falls to the point where it becomes embarrassing, people will just stop reporting it. Problem solved!

I genuinely believe that we could get to the stage where elections are decided by less than 1% of the notional electorate without anybody who actually matters giving the least shit. In fact, I suspect they'd bee quite pleased with that state of affairs - it would save them a lot of tedious bullshitting. The idea that the so-called "legitimacy" of the state will fade away if only enough people stop voting is a fairy story.

Not that it's ever going to happen anyway. People will continue to vote because they want to believe that it matters, and no amount of evidence to the contrary is going to stop them. If it could, it would have happened already.

Charles F. Oxtrot said...

From a Nonny Mouse who snarks on the supposed stance of higher morality taken by those who don't vote:

In the meantime, I agree with people like that corporate sellout Obamabot stooge Chomsky who say that sometimes, the trivial differences between the parties can translate into beneficial results for some of the worst off in our society.

Naivete cures all ailments, especially the existential ones surrounding personal responsibility. Thank GooGoo that Chomsky's "expertise" clears a path for the incurious.

mp said...

re: Chomsky.

Appeals to authority are always helpful in conversations with anarchists.

LA Confidential Pantload said...

mp 12:38 PM

More win than we're entitled to on a Tuesday afternoon.

LA Confidential Pantload said...

....or a Wednesday, come to think of it.

George Jones said...

Is this a...?

Paul Alexander said...

Dunc, my argument was stupid and contradictory. I see that now. I think that a non-vote in a system that worked the way people say they would like it to would count as a vote of no confidence or whatever, but you're right, I'm sure the Dems couldn't give a shit either way. I also don't think that non-voting is in anyway more effective than voting, I just don't think it matters either way.

Anonymous said...

Re "primers for the ninnying nonny's," doesn't it seem a bit odd to anyone that the texts cited to rout the enemies of anarchism are all written by the world renowned, if anonymous activist and thinker Whoisioz?

I can think of a few theories which might explain this, off the top of my head.

Brian M said...

Ad hominem attacks are as useless as appeals to authority, Nonny 4:17

Nobody is claiming that Ioz or his commentariate are "experts" or speak for anyone. This was merely a response to clueless pwoggies who wander in here with no understanding of the basic themes, gist of the site.

So...anyway, just keep BLAWGING, man.

la Rana said...

let me get this straight. You come in here caterwauling about how seriously we take the moral imperitive of not voting. I tell you that you have grossly misread the situation, and fundie provides proof that IOZ and the gang don't give a shit who votes for what. Then you claim that we are engaging in hero worship to validate our entire worldview, on the basis that we provided you textual evidence that your impression of IOZ's opinion on the matter of voting was grossly off the mark?

The lack of self-awareness you display in pairing transparent misrepresentations with sneering pomposity suggests a mind that has never for a fucking second thought about the world. Everything Mommy told you was right, wasn't it? No need to start now.

You should run for office. I'd vote for you.

Anonymous said...

You're seriously berating an anonymous commentator for lack of self awareness? For the record, I am not he who caterwauled about the moral imperitive [oh, hell - sic] of not voting being taken too seriously, and you didn't tell me anything recently. So far as I know.

Your concern about being seen to fluff your host shows a bit of self-awareness. Tellingly, I didn't say anything of the kind. But no worries: to quote the same individual (apparently), "This is a blog and you shouldn't take anything said here seriously. because it doesn't matter, and most importantly... you fell for it."

Mr.Fundamental said...

actually, I kinda feel sad for voters. they keep getting fucked, be it on Tuesday, Saturday, or next Wednesday. dios mio mang

LA Confidential Pantload said...

Don't cry for me, Mr. Fun. I enjoy voting: it's free, I have to walk by the polling place in any event to catch my bus to work, and I get a chance to shoot the shit with some of the neighbors I don't see that often. The standing-behind-the-curtain-pushing-buttons shit only takes a couple minutes anyway, and is basically harmless as far as I can tell; I've certainly never seen any difference between times I've voted and times I haven't.

Anonymous said...

Voting is basically blogging with less self-expression.

Mr.Fundamental said...

Any chimp can play human for a day
And use his opposable thumbs to iron his uniform;
And run for office on election day;
And fancy himself a real decision maker,
Then deploy more troops than salt in a shaker.
But it's a jungle when war is made,
And you'll panic and throw your own shit at the enemy.
The camera pulls back to reveal your true identity.
Look, it's a sheep in wolf's clothing,
A smoking gun holding ape.

Anonymous said...

LACP

I cry for you, bro. Those 2-3 minutes you sacrifice on the altar of the state will never come back.

OTOH, sacrificing to Mammon is sacrificing to Mammon, no matter how "cool" you act during the act.

Capt'n Obvious

LA Confidential Pantload said...

Thanks for your sympathy, Cap, but I figure the trade-off of 15-20 minutes of neighborly camaraderie pays for 2-3 minutes of electronic wanking.

And let's face it, after that I gotta spend the next 8 hours sacrificing to Mammon.

Anonymous said...

This place is even easier to troll than Digby's these days.

Anonymous said...

LACP

But what's wrong with just picking up the phone and dialing the neighbor, or even better, just walking up to their door and knocking on it?

At work, Mammon has to at least pretend to pay you, unlike the political process, which at best gives one squat, at worse takes ones' life?

Capt'n Obvious

mistah charley, ph.d. said...

What would Garrison Keillor do?

MQ said...

Can't you read, Paul. It makes a tiny difference! Domestically! For a small group of people!

It obviously makes a real difference for millions of people. But hey, it's tiny compared to the distance between the real world and the ideal society you built in your head. Temper tantrum time!

davidly said...

You're right, MQ. What could be more obvious than helping people out of their predicament by blowing them up? vive la différence!

la Rana said...

Are you oblivious to the obviously obvious good stuff?! IZ BETTER THAN THE BAD STUFF!

Anonymous said...

Frog, shouldn't you be prosecuting teenagers for possessing a dime bag or something?