Does current political discourse depress you?

[Beware_of_Doug]

@Trinopus

These are the times that try our souls…

The fundamentalism, the ultimism, the absolutism, the utter rejection of bipartisanship, the poisonous rejection of compromise… These are all symptoms of deep moral rejection of the civic process.

I would call it deep amoral rejection of the civic process. The discourse has essentially been brought down to fighting for the survival of one’s tribe.

The good news is that the system is robust. We aren’t going to break down into tyranny. Not this time around, anyway. It may happen, but it won’t happen in the next four years.

What is most frightening is that there are those who want to put us on a course for tyranny, but cannot admit or even understand that it is tyranny they want.

The corporate sector has no endgame and no notion of one - only to generate dollar numbers forever. Social conservatives don’t do much better: their future is gated, pious, and mostly White, but otherwise, it’s a blur.

[lance_strongarm]

Come on, guys, lighten up. It’s just politics. It’s nothing new. It’s human nature. Ignore the ugly stuff and move on.

Here’s some perspective for you:

Attack Ads, Circa 1800

[gamerunknown]

@lance strongarm

It’s just politics.

Putting that statement in perspective.

Or here’s what Chomsky had to say, in the context of postmodernism:

@Chomsky

Phetland also found it “particularly puzzling” that I am so “curtly dismissive” of these intellectual circles while I spend a lot of time “exposing the posturing and obfuscation of the New York Times.” So “why not give these guys the same treatment.” Fair question. There are also simple answers. What appears in the work I do address (NYT, journals of opinion, much of scholarship, etc.) is simply written in intelligible prose and has a great impact on the world, establishing the doctrinal framework within which thought and expression are supposed to be contained, and largely are, in successful doctrinal systems such as ours. That has a huge impact on what happens to suffering people throughout the world, the ones who concern me, as distinct from those who live in the world that Lodge depicts (accurately, I think). So this work should be dealt with seriously, at least if one cares about ordinary people and their problems. The work to which Phetland refers has none of these characteristics, as far as I’m aware. It certainly has none of the impact, since it is addressed only to other intellectuals in the same circles. Furthermore, there is no effort that I am aware of to make it intelligible to the great mass of the population (say, to the people I’m constantly speaking to, meeting with, and writing letters to, and have in mind when I write, and who seem to understand what I say without any particular difficulty, though they generally seem to have the same cognitive disability I do when facing the postmodern cults). And I’m also aware of no effort to show how it applies to anything in the world in the sense I mentioned earlier: grounding conclusions that weren’t already obvious. Since I don’t happen to be much interested in the ways that intellectuals inflate their reputations, gain privilege and prestige, and disengage themselves from actual participation in popular struggle, I don’t spend any time on it.

[lance_strongarm]

@gamerunknown

Putting that statement in perspective.

Or here’s what Chomsky had to say, in the context of postmodernism:

Hmmm, Chomsky and post-modernism. I think I see your problem.

[Beware_of_Doug]

@lance_strongarm

Come on, guys, lighten up. It’s just politics. It’s nothing new. It’s human nature. Ignore the ugly stuff and move on.

Man, I’d sure like to. It’s just this, though: every generation thinks it’s the smartest ever. But I can’t figure out whether we indulge that hubris more by believing everything’s gonna go to hell, or by thinking everything’s gonna be fine.

[gamerunknown]

@lance strongarm

Hmmm, Chomsky and post-modernism. I think I see your problem.

I think your problem extends beyond your lack of reading comprehension, I’m afraid.

[suranyi]

It especially depresses me when I see a stupid semantic argument like the one about “you didn’t build that” being fought over as if it represented a policy disagreement.

[Robot_Arm]

@suranyi

It especially depresses me when I see a stupid semantic argument like the one about “you didn’t build that” being fought over as if it represented a policy disagreement.

I agree, but I would find it even worse to let the false claims and misrepresentations be repeated and believed.

[lance_strongarm]

@gamerunknown

I think your problem extends beyond your lack of reading comprehension, I’m afraid.

Don’t send people off to read stuff any more. Make your case. I am not your student.

[Bpelta]

I have to be honest, I find conversations about politics to be fun…

But what does get me is how bad liberals seem to be on getting the facts out…about Obamacare, etc. Maybe I’m wrong, but I feel like the conservative media is much more effective than liberal forces in this country.

[Drum_God]

@Bpelta

I have to be honest, I find conversations about politics to be fun…

But what does get me is how bad liberals seem to be on getting the facts out…about Obamacare, etc. Maybe I’m wrong, but I feel like the conservative media is much more effective than liberal forces in this country.

Conservatives have much better discipline than liberals do. They can be much more monolithic.