# David Mamet enters the political fray with this new book, and it's sure not what you expected! **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [May 30, 2011, 2:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/david-mamet-enters-the-political-fray-with-this-new-book-and-its-sure-not-what-you-expected/583730 "2011-05-30T02:55:52Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2011, 3:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/david-mamet-enters-the-political-fray-with-this-new-book-and-its-sure-not-what-you-expected/583730/41 "2011-05-31T15:01:23Z")
> [@Evil\_Captor](#): > > The fact that he changed his mind does not in and of itself indicate poor judgement, it’s the BASIS for that change that demonstrates poor/good judgement. No need to guess about that – he told us straight up that his views changed because he was a “have-not” then and a “have” now, which is obviously irrelevant to the objective merit of either his old or his new position. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2011, 3:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/david-mamet-enters-the-political-fray-with-this-new-book-and-its-sure-not-what-you-expected/583730/42 "2011-05-31T15:05:45Z")
> [@Starving\_Artist](#): > > And besides, it’s not like the government would have had to cough up significantly less money to prop up GM or Wall Street bankers if only the CEOs involved weren’t making so much money. Not so. The amount of food vermin actually consume is small compared to the amount of food that is lost as a result of verminous infestation. Similarly, the actual illicit gains of crony “capitalists” who decouple their pay from their performance is trivial compared to the economic damage caused by breaking the feedback mechanism. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2011, 3:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/david-mamet-enters-the-political-fray-with-this-new-book-and-its-sure-not-what-you-expected/583730/43 "2011-05-31T15:05:47Z")
“What’s the secret knowledge?” “FUCK YOU, that’s the secret knowledge!” ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2011, 3:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/david-mamet-enters-the-political-fray-with-this-new-book-and-its-sure-not-what-you-expected/583730/44 "2011-05-31T15:20:15Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > How so? If Mamet was wrong about a subject for thirty years, doesn’t that indicate a lack of knowledge and/or poor judgement? And if he was wrong for thirty years, why should I trust his knowledge and judgement on this subject now? Well, let’s see, if someone defended high CEO salaries and Wall Street bailouts on the basis of, “Being rich means God approves of you, so we gotta support our rich people who are beloved by God cause they will do good things, being God’s people” then I would say that demonstrates poor judgement, because the person is kind of ignoring the existence of an awful lot of devout Christians who are very poor, and some Bible verses that specifically cite rich people as problematical in God’s eye (camel and needles eye, etc.). Now if someone defends high CEO salaries on the basis that the salaries are tiny in terms of the net profits/worth of the companies they head and that their decisions are important to the continued success of said companies and therefore are justified, if very high, and the defend Wall Street bailouts on the grounds that they were a stopgap measure needed to prevent a total breakdown in the financial system, well, I will disagree with them, but I will find their rationales much more deserving of a thoughtful response, and indicative of sounder judgement. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2011, 3:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/david-mamet-enters-the-political-fray-with-this-new-book-and-its-sure-not-what-you-expected/583730/45 "2011-05-31T15:23:29Z")
I’m not really getting an angle on what he’s defining as “liberal.” Is he basically just a rich guy that doesn’t want to pay his taxes, or has he also become a social conservative as well? Has he decided that evolution is a liberal plot and that gay marriage is an attack on America and all that kind of shit. His statements about “belief” don’t seem to parse since it’s the political right in the US which is subsumed in magical beliefs (such as global warming denial, creationism, “American exceptionalism,” free market mythology, superstitious fears about sexual purity, and terrors of homosexuality, etc.). How is Mamet characterizing “liberal” and “conservative,” exactly? If he’s become a social conservative, then he lacks critical thinking skills and should be dismissed as an idiot. If he has not become a social conservative, then he’s not really conservative. ---
**Author:** ![Sarahfeena](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sarahfeena/32/519_2.png) [@Sarahfeena](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sarahfeena)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2011, 3:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/david-mamet-enters-the-political-fray-with-this-new-book-and-its-sure-not-what-you-expected/583730/46 "2011-05-31T15:38:51Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > I’m not really getting an angle on what he’s defining as “liberal.” Is he basically just a rich guy that doesn’t want to pay his taxes, or has he also become a social conservative as well? Has he decided that evolution is a liberal plot and that gay marriage is an attack on America and all that kind of shit. His statements about “belief” don’t seem to parse since it’s the political right in the US which is subsumed in magical beliefs (such as global warming denial, creationism, “American exceptionalism,” free market mythology, superstitious fears about sexual purity, and terrors of homosexuality, etc.). > > How is Mamet characterizing “liberal” and “conservative,” exactly? If he’s become a social conservative, then he lacks critical thinking skills and should be dismissed as an idiot. If he has not become a social conservative, then he’s not really conservative. So I can be a fiscal conservative, and you all will still think I’m a liberal? Awesome…best of both worlds! 🙂 I haven’t read his book, but I’m guessing he’s conservative like, I don’t know, Dennis Miller…a post-9/11 conservative, who thinks we need less government (except when it comes to the military) and lower taxes. I think that’s conservative enough to call yourself one. ---
**Author:** ![fumster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e9c0ed/32.png) [@fumster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fumster)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2011, 3:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/david-mamet-enters-the-political-fray-with-this-new-book-and-its-sure-not-what-you-expected/583730/47 "2011-05-31T15:42:22Z")
This my favorite: > [@](#): > > Because as Milton Friedman said, the question is not what are the decisions but who makes the decisions. Because when the government starts deciding what’s absurd, you’re on the road to serfdom. I always thought that when the _landowners_ made the decisions you were on your way to serfdom. But then again, what do I know? My car is worth more than my watch. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2011, 3:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/david-mamet-enters-the-political-fray-with-this-new-book-and-its-sure-not-what-you-expected/583730/48 "2011-05-31T15:50:47Z")
> [@Sarahfeena](#): > > So I can be a fiscal conservative, and you all will still think I’m a liberal? I don’t think it’s that simple, but Mamet is using language to suggest that it is - that “liberal” is all one thing. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2011, 3:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/david-mamet-enters-the-political-fray-with-this-new-book-and-its-sure-not-what-you-expected/583730/49 "2011-05-31T15:57:26Z")
> [@Evil\_Captor](#): > > Well, let’s see, if someone defended high CEO salaries and Wall Street bailouts on the basis of, “Being rich means God approves of you, so we gotta support our rich people who are beloved by God cause they will do good things, being God’s people” then I would say that demonstrates poor judgement, because the person is kind of ignoring the existence of an awful lot of devout Christians who are very poor, and some Bible verses that specifically cite rich people as problematical in God’s eye (camel and needles eye, etc.). > > Now if someone defends high CEO salaries on the basis that the salaries are tiny in terms of the net profits/worth of the companies they head and that their decisions are important to the continued success of said companies and therefore are justified, if very high, and the defend Wall Street bailouts on the grounds that they were a stopgap measure needed to prevent a total breakdown in the financial system, well, I will disagree with them, but I will find their rationales much more deserving of a thoughtful response, and indicative of sounder judgement. What evidence does he offer for the latter that’s anymore plausible than the former? Does he do an analysis of various corporations and find that the ones with the highest CEO salaries make the greatest profits? (He doesn’t because this isn’t true.) Mamet just says the high CEO salaries are good because … they’re not bad. He might as well as offered divine approval as justification. Sh1bu1 makes the valid point that Mamet claims that serfdom is when you let a democratically elected government make decisions. So you abolish serfdom by taking democracy out of the picture and letting the wealthy and powerful people make the decisions. And I’m supposed to respect the intelligence of somebody who says this? I’ll admit I never heard about Mamet’s political views prior to his recent conversion. And that, to me, indicates he was wiser when he was a liberal. Because apparently as a liberal, he was willing to stay relatively quiet on subjects he was not very well-informed on. ---
**Author:** ![VinylTurnip](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/b2d939/32.png) [@VinylTurnip](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/VinylTurnip)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2011, 4:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/david-mamet-enters-the-political-fray-with-this-new-book-and-its-sure-not-what-you-expected/583730/50 "2011-05-31T16:04:08Z")
> [@Avumede](#): > > Mamet’s newfound conservatism is only surprising if you haven’t been paying any attention to anything he’s been doing for the last few years. I haven’t read his book, but his attacking global warming doesn’t give me any hope of reading something interesting, new, or substantial. I had never heard anything about (nor particularly cared about) Mamet’s political views nor his opinions outside of his films, but simply based on my impressions of his work I would’ve guessed him to at least lean conservative, if I’d had to guess. So no, not particularly shocking. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2011, 4:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/david-mamet-enters-the-political-fray-with-this-new-book-and-its-sure-not-what-you-expected/583730/51 "2011-05-31T16:20:15Z")
**David Mamet Exchanges One Herd for Another** [http://near-earth.com/2011/05/15/david-mamet-exchanges-one-herd-for-another/](http://near-earth.com/2011/05/15/david-mamet-exchanges-one-herd-for-another/) > [@](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > ``` > > The reverence came to an end when [Mamet] finally noticed an incongruity between Brecht’s politics and his life. Although a cold-blooded—indeed bloody-minded—advocate for public ownership of the means of production and state confiscation of private wealth, he always took care to copyright his plays. More, he made sure the royalties were deposited in a Swiss bank account far from the clutches of East Germany, where he was nominally a citizen. > > > > “His protestations [against capitalism] were not borne out by his actions, nor could they be,” Mamet writes. “Why, then, did he profess Communism? Because it sold. . . .” > > > > ``` > > This is disingenuous, it seems to me. I don’t profess to know anything about Brecht’s biography, but at least in the abstract, this much is true: Brecht was not operating within a communist utopia, he was operating in a world in which one had to protect one’s work within the context of capitalism and ownership. What does Mamet expect? That Brecht should have thrown his works into the public domain and denied himself an income all in the name of ideological consistency? To do so would have been akin to playing under the rules of baseball in the middle of a football game. But it is his position on global warming that really demonstrates that Mamet does not care about facts, so he is not being “more mature”. > [@](#): > > But Ferguson does a service by putting a mirror up to Mamet’s complaint: > > > [@](#): > > > > ``` > > The conversion is complete: This is not a book by the same man who told Charlie Rose he didn’t want to impose his political views on anybody. At some moments—as when he blithely announces that the earth is cooling not warming, QED *—you wonder whether maybe he isn’t in danger of exchanging one herd for another. He told me he doesn’t read political blogs or magazines. “I drive around and listen to the talk show guys,” he said. “Beck, Prager, Hugh Hewitt, Michael Medved.” > > > > ``` > > Yeah. You think global warming is a hoax and you listen to Glenn Beck and his raving ilk. Welcome to your new, angrier, dumber herd, David. Make sure you don’t get out of step. I hear this herd is particularly merciless to its own when they stray. In fact, I have to question those who claim that he is a “towering intellect” If Rush Limbaugh and Beck are the ones that changed you, you bet that I’m not impressed at all by the reasons he is giving for his conversion. - In fact even one of the last working scientists that is skeptical of global warming, Pat Michaels, told the American Heritage that anyone using that “it has not cooled in the last 10 years” canard would kill all the skeptical movement as it is one of the most stupid ideas used against global warming. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2011, 6:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/david-mamet-enters-the-political-fray-with-this-new-book-and-its-sure-not-what-you-expected/583730/52 "2011-05-31T18:03:20Z")
[QUOTE=Little Nemo] What evidence does he offer for the latter that’s anymore plausible than the former? Does he do an analysis of various corporations and find that the ones with the highest CEO salaries make the greatest profits? (He doesn’t because this isn’t true.) Mamet just says the high CEO salaries are good because … they’re not bad. He might as well as offered divine approval as justification. [/quote] I never said I thought Mamet’s judgement was sound, only that I would need to know his rationale for changing his mind before I could judge. If he is getting his ideas from talk radio types, as indicated upthread, that’s a concern, too. ---
**Author:** ![Oakminster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/77aa72/32.png) [@Oakminster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Oakminster)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2011, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/david-mamet-enters-the-political-fray-with-this-new-book-and-its-sure-not-what-you-expected/583730/53 "2011-05-31T18:09:43Z")
At last a liberal has finally seen the light. Maybe there’s hope for the rest of the deluded left… ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2011, 6:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/david-mamet-enters-the-political-fray-with-this-new-book-and-its-sure-not-what-you-expected/583730/54 "2011-05-31T18:10:46Z")
What is a “liberal?” ---
**Author:** ![Peremensoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ce7236/32.png) [@Peremensoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peremensoe)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2011, 6:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/david-mamet-enters-the-political-fray-with-this-new-book-and-its-sure-not-what-you-expected/583730/55 "2011-05-31T18:16:42Z")
> [@aldiboronti](#): > > He has a fierce intellect… Really? I’m not real familiar with the guy, but I read the _New York Times_ magazine bit on Sunday, and was taken aback by the overall vapidity. _This_ guy is counted an intellectual… really? ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2011, 6:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/david-mamet-enters-the-political-fray-with-this-new-book-and-its-sure-not-what-you-expected/583730/56 "2011-05-31T18:18:16Z")
> [@Evil\_Captor](#): > > I never said I thought Mamet’s judgement was sound, only that I would need to know his rationale for changing his mind before I could judge. If he is getting his ideas from talk radio types, as indicated upthread, that’s a concern, too. Yes, it would be one thing if his views were changed because he had earned a degree in economics or political science. But changing his views because he started listening to a different group of pundits isn’t a sign of growing wisdom. Mamet was dumb if he believed everything that Jane Fonda and Michael Moore and Noam Chomsky said and now he’s dumb is he believes everything that Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck and Michael Medved say. You get smarter when you start actually thinking about things not when you just change the channel. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2011, 11:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/david-mamet-enters-the-political-fray-with-this-new-book-and-its-sure-not-what-you-expected/583730/57 "2011-05-31T23:08:16Z")
> [@spark240](#): > > Really? I’m not real familiar with the guy, but I read the _New York Times_ magazine bit on Sunday, and was taken aback by the overall vapidity. _This_ guy is counted an intellectual… really? Well, “Hollywood Intellectual”. It’s kind of like being the most athletic guy in your Dungeons and Dragons group. ---
**Author:** ![Bosstone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/22d042/32.png) [@Bosstone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosstone)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2011, 12:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/david-mamet-enters-the-political-fray-with-this-new-book-and-its-sure-not-what-you-expected/583730/58 "2011-06-01T00:17:02Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > Well, “Hollywood Intellectual”. It’s kind of like being the most athletic guy in your Dungeons and Dragons group. “_Matt Damon._” ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2011, 12:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/david-mamet-enters-the-political-fray-with-this-new-book-and-its-sure-not-what-you-expected/583730/59 "2011-06-01T00:29:35Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > Well, “Hollywood Intellectual”. It’s kind of like being the most athletic guy in your Dungeons and Dragons group. My D&D group includes a Marine and an army Ranger. Just sayin’. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2011, 5:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/david-mamet-enters-the-political-fray-with-this-new-book-and-its-sure-not-what-you-expected/583730/60 "2011-06-01T05:14:14Z")
Oh sure, ruin a good joke with _facts_. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/david-mamet-enters-the-political-fray-with-this-new-book-and-its-sure-not-what-you-expected/583730.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/david-mamet-enters-the-political-fray-with-this-new-book-and-its-sure-not-what-you-expected/583730.md?page=4)