From: Platt Holden (pholden@sc.rr.com)
Date: Fri Oct 14 2005 - 22:01:48 BST
Platt previously:
>> >Apparently Arlo doesn't see that his anti-dichotomy stance creates an
> >equally severe dichotomy -- those in favor and those against dichotomies.
> >Equally, his condemnation of party lines is itself a party line -- those
> >who like to refer to themselves as independents.
>
> Bizarre logic, Platt.
How so?
> >Although in Arlo's mind, his independent Marxist "party" is good, while
> >the conservative and liberal parties are evil.
> What deceptive and disingenuous rhetoric, Platt. You know this is not true,
> from the many other times I've answered this and similar charges, and yet
> you continue to repeat this. Why?
Why? Because you repeat your charge that both conservatives and liberals
are evil, as you did in this very post, as follows:
> > > To clarify futher, I'm not saying "I" am suffering attacks from the
> > > left and right, I said that both the liberals and conservatives use
> > > fear tactics to distract popular dialogue away from examination of the
> > > system. This is what I mean, and MSH had argued much earlier, that both
> > > conservatives and liberals are really not that different. Both are
> > > pawns to wealth and power interests. Both battle each other, but only
> > > to secure power for itself, not really to instigate change or
> > > solutions. We are swept up in the "go team!" rhetoric and lose sight of
> > > the critical dialogue.
And in the following passage you stake out your position as an
independent:
> > > I don't think you need to be "apolitical", Erin. I think a good
> > > solution is to use the right-left meter to apply to beliefs, not to
> > > people. And to find a way to look across the spectrum for solutions,
> > > and mix/match/select based on Quality, not on "my team must defeat the
> > > evil so-and-so's". And to remember that on the big Left-Right meter,
> > > todays "liberals" and "conservatives" are both about 1mm apart
> > > somewhere just right of center.
Platt previously
> >On the contrary, the policies espoused by liberals and conservatives are
> >miles apart. Social Security reform and education vouchers are just two
> >examples.
> Hardly. But you keep on shouting this.
Shouting? Where do you see shouting?
> If these policies are "miles apart"
> then the political spectrum must be the size of a galaxy. Not to mention
> the many alternatives to party-line reform suggestions. You try to make it
> sound like the only two options are the "conservative-all good" approach,
> and the "liberal-all evil" approach, but that's more sad than it is
> laughable.
Please list other options that anybody is proposing that anyone is taking
seriously.
Platt previously
> >Arlo doesn't think he gets "swept up" in rhetoric but is somehow able to
> >rise above it all to examine issues "critically." The hidden premise is
> >that the rest of us are stupid peons, incapable of attaining his lofty
> >"critical" perch.
> More deliberate deception, Platt. Methinks you'd make a good politician.
> Nowhere, and at no time, have I ever intimated that anyone is a "stupid
> peon" or incapable of critical thought. I've lamented from day one that
> critical thinking skills are not stressed great enough in the curriculum,
> leaving many susceptible to the type of deceptive, manipulative rhetoric of
> distraction used by both parties.
My point precisely. "Many susceptible to the type of deceptive,
manipulative rhetoric of distraction used by both parties." Of course, you
are not deceived, but "many" are, i.e., many are incapable of critical
thought except Arlo who has somehow, in spite of bad schools, managed to
attain critical thinking skills. Now maybe you don't mean it that way, but
that's how it comes across. In any case, note your attack on those evil
parties again because they use "deceptive, manipulative rhetoric."
> You reply to me on this point is a prime
> example of this: I complain the dialogue is full of distraction, and you
> counter charging me with calling everyone stupid. So typical of party
> propaganda, and just sad, really.
What's sad is you inability to recognize how, in saying the many are
incapable of critical thinking, i.e., stupid, you are not putting yourself
on a higher plateau of intelligence.
Platt previously
> >Yes, and in the revolution Marx promises to abolish private property. All
> >power is granted to the "Giant, unforgettably described by Pirsig:
> Except this Giant Pirsig talks about in your quote was not Marxist or
> Capitalist, but the nature of social level patterns emerging from (and
> devouring) lower level biological patterns.
Yes. Please relay your interpretation to Ant who thinks Pirsig was talking
only about New York, not social patterns in general. .
>Why do you use in a way to
> indicate that this devouring is somehow "Marxist"? I think you know better,
> and assume your tactics are, again, deliberately manipulative.
If you read about the Giant carefully you will note that it devours people
just like Marxism does for "the greater good."
> Indeed, the
> Giant Pirsig describes is New York City!
I thought you just said, and I agreed with you, that the Giant exemplified
the "nature of social patterns!" New York is used merely as an example of
such patterns.
Platt previously
> >Maybe Arlo finds the social patterns of the Giant appealing, but to me
> >they mean one thing -- you guessed it -- gulags, as was demonstrated when
> >intellect put the Giant's patterns into practice on a grand scale.
> Here again you deliberatly misuse Pirsig's sentiment. The Giant of social
> patterns Pirsig examplified with New York City, modern capitalist NYC.
Well, I least we agree on New York being an example, not the Giant itself.
> Not
> some Marxist Giant waiting to come and take you to a gulag, but a feature
> of the social level that places social-level patterns as higher organisms
> than biological patterns. Doesn't matter if your city is in Stalinist
> Russia or Reagan America (as Pirsig's example was).
Oh, but it does matter, as Pirsig goes on to explain why Marxist socialism
has failed compared to capitalism -- no room for DQ. Remember? With
capitalism comes intellectual freedom which makes NYC the dynamic place
that Pirsig praises.
> But I hope others got the point about Marx and this idiotic association of
> his ideas with modern liberalism. Like I said, he would GLADLY support all
> your conservative "progressive" ideas to "abolish welfare", abolish social
> security, abolish food stamps, minimum wage, unemployment, workers'
> compensation, mandatory health care for full time employees, work week and
> age restrictions to labor, and all those programs. He'd say they were
> useless band-aids that served to placate and distract.
>
> "Abolish them," Platt, he'd say, "I support you. Let's end them all right
> now. And what do you think would happen next?"
Abolish them and take away all that I own for redistribution to the
undeserved and to satiate the Giant? Thanks for no thanks.
Platt
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 : Fri Oct 14 2005 - 22:51:12 BST