Re: MD MOQ and The Moral Society II

From: Arlo J. Bensinger (ajb102@psu.edu)
Date: Wed Jul 06 2005 - 02:15:39 BST

  • Next message: platootje@netscape.net: "RE: MD The intellectual mess cleared up."

    Platt,

    Part II:

    > > Can you show me statistics or measures that indicate that the US scores
    higher on these marks (in your previous reply) than Germany, Denmark, Sweden,
    and Japan? Or are you just going on patriotic "gut instinct" that America is
    better than everyone else in these measures?
    >
    > Going by the observations of Denesh D'Sousa, a foreign observer.
    > Statistics never tell the whole story.
    > For his observations see:
    >
    > www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-dsouza070203.asp

    I read the article. Some comments on his points:

    (1) America provides an amazingly good life for the ordinary guy.

    From a materialistic perspective this is certainly true. We have more "stuff"
    than the citizens of many, in not most, other nations. But to agree that this
    makes us "better", you have to believe that the amount of material goods we own
    is what counts. Platt, I'm sure you do. Me, I don't. Although our middle class
    has far greater material accumulation than other countries, we (middle class)
    have no greater political or social leverage than at any time in our history or
    compared to the middle class in other countries.

    We are, as Marx would say, confusing material possessions with power and
    control. We are "opiated" by our possessions into thinking that the more we
    own, the better off we are. This was his fundamental criticism of materialism.
    We stop caring that we are powerless pawns and "feel good" because we own a
    "nice car", or have a television in three rooms. We define "better lives" as
    "owning more stuff".

    If that's what you believe, and I know it is, that's fine. But it assumes that
    material accumulation is the key to "better lives". I believe this to be
    patently false, and a manipultive device by those in power.

    (2) America offers more opportunity and social mobility than any other country,
    including the countries of Europe.

    This is, again, patently false. Study after study has shown that for the *vast*
    majority, social mobility is a myth. There are, of course, examples of those
    that do experience class progression, but they are (as I've said to Ham)
    exceptions to the rule. This is *not* to say that social mobility occurs in
    Europe, or in any other country. The studies have all indicated that the
    overall majority of citizens world-wide die with the same socio-economic
    leverage they are born into. Being in America does not provide any greater
    chance than being in Germany.

    (3) Work and trade are respectable in America, which is not true elsewhere.

    Which is simply the most idiotic, and untrue, statement I've confronted in a
    while. On the CONTRARY, Americans treat their laborers as if they are an
    underclass. Just last year, Bush significantly cut the funding for vocational
    education at the K12 level. University populations are increasing to a point
    where an undergraduate degree is practically meaningless. We are not funneling
    talented people into vocational trades. We are doing the opposite. In the
    European countries where I've spent considerable time, Germany and Denmark,
    there is a far greater respect for trades and vocational education than in the
    US. This is, likely, due to an historical apprenticeship model that placed
    great value in skilled labor.

    In ZMM, Pirsig laments the decline in valuation of trade skills. The old shop
    gurus were replaced with kids with no valuation for the work at hand, because
    society has told them its meaningless. Admittedly, all the privileged nations
    of the world are all guilty of devaluing vocational skills to some degree, it
    is not a matter of either-or, but of degrees.

    (4) America has achieved greater social equality than any other society.

    The authors support of this is based on a belief that the average American would
    not kiss Bill Gates feet for $100. As, I suppose, all Canadians and Germans
    would do immediately and without hesitation. Since the author presents this
    soley as "I believe this be true" without offering any supportive evidence,
    I'll just ignore it. I know measures that can examine the validity of such a
    statement, but since the author feels no need to provide any support, why
    should I? After all, this amounts to nothing more than patriotic feel-goodism.
    You can't argue with that.

    (5) People live longer, fuller lives in America.

    More lunacy. According to the CIA World Factbook, the US ranks ***46t*** in
    worldwide life expectancy.

    http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/rankorder/2102rank.html

    46th. Methinks D'Souza is obviously more concerned with patriotic propaganda
    than truthful arguments. At any rate, part of this claim is also that the
    elderly in the US are "living better lives" than the elderly elsewhere. Of
    course, he provides no "proof" in statistics or measures, he just "believes it
    to be so".

    (6) In America the destiny of the young is not given to them but created by
    them.

    The myth of class progression aside, he compares a typical trajectory for his
    life had he stayed in India, versus coming here. And he makes a valid point. To
    someone with the privilege of wealth, getting interested in literature and
    being able to study it at the university is, perhaps, more common here than in
    India (I don't know for sure, but I'll go on his word.) But this is actually
    suprassed by the freedoms of the European educational system that foregrounds
    ongoing learning and access to education for more citizens over a greater
    length of their lives than in the US. Statistics bear this out. The cost of
    higher education (and the cutting of the Pell Grants) makes "playing" with a
    college degree an impossibility for most Americans, while in Europe it is more
    feasable to consider.

    As for his chosen wife, perhaps America does have a greater degree of ethnic
    diveristy than this home country. I won't argue with him on that. What is
    actually interesting is that he hits upon a key component of what I believe to
    be a "higher Quality society", namely one with ethnic diveristy. Intersting.
    So, I'll agree with him on that.

    Same with America being great because an Indian can work in the White House,
    where in other countries more xenophobic attitudes may exist to prevent this.
    So, okay, I agree again. Greater diversity, greater acceptance of
    multi-ethnicity and greater promotion and advancement of peoples with
    non-white, non-european backgrounds makes America "better" than as he describes
    India.

    As I've said, the one thing I have repeatedly argued as being the "best" thing
    about America is that, in most of her urban areas, one finds a great degree of
    multi-cultural, multi-ethnic and multi-lingual populations. If only the rest of
    America would see the value in this.

    I wonder, however, if Mr. D'Souza's experience would have been so positive had
    he moved to a small community in Montana or Nebraska? Anyways...

    The remaining "assertions" I find so laughable as to be unworthy of comment. For
    those that may not have viewed the article:

    (7) America has gone further than any other society in establishing equality of
    rights
    (8) America has found a solution to the problem of religious and ethnic conflict
    that continues to divide and terrorize much of the world
    (9) America has the kindest, gentlest foreign policy of any great power in world
    history (this one, perhaps, takes the cake, which says a lot!)
    (10) America, the freest nation on earth, is also the most virtuous nation on
    earth

    Keep in mind, ALL of these are unsupported by any measure or proof other than
    "we are the best". Who can argue with blind patriotic ferver? But I wouldn't
    expect any real critical discourse in the National Review. Or the need for an
    author to support any claim in favor of America.

    > Furthermore, keep in mind Pirsig's observation that socialist cities are
    > "dull places."

    I can't speak to Pirsig's personal observations. But I have spent a lot of time
    in non-US cities. My experience is that Paris, Munich, Amsterdam, Rome, Cancun,
    Mexico City (to name some) very much NOT dull. Indeed, I've been to much duller
    places in America (Toledo, anyone?).

    If Pirsig is speaking of his personal experience in any of these cities, then
    I'd offer him my devoted tour-expertise to convince him otherwise. :-)

    Arlo

    MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
    MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
    http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 06 2005 - 02:53:35 BST