tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post8533294931928058357..comments2024-03-18T22:21:33.261-07:00Comments on The Debate Link: What's a Few More Deaths for the Revolution?David Schraubhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04946653376744012423noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post-7675220178622216652008-12-25T12:18:00.000-08:002008-12-25T12:18:00.000-08:00He is at least by the transitive property of being...He is at least by the transitive property of being a dick.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04268585506327621265noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post-66127189143275639092008-12-25T11:52:00.000-08:002008-12-25T11:52:00.000-08:00Isn't Ralph Nader a proponent of this view?Isn't Ralph Nader a proponent of this view?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post-24933523507716333512008-12-23T18:10:00.000-08:002008-12-23T18:10:00.000-08:00Relieve enough symptoms and the existence of some ...Relieve enough symptoms and the existence of some structural condition isn't much of a problem.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04268585506327621265noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post-67589572113652918732008-12-23T14:44:00.000-08:002008-12-23T14:44:00.000-08:00This is precisely why abstract analogies (in this ...This is precisely why abstract analogies (in this case, medical ones) are so idiotic and the hobgoblin of small minds with delusions of grandeur.<BR/><BR/>A palliative "reduces pain without actual curing the underlying cause" of the problem. In this case, the structural conditions creating the suffering/inequality that afflicts the American underclass.<BR/><BR/>You can take Dr. House's advice in medicine because the structure -- the human body -- is all that matters (and importantly, that one relevant subject is consenting). It would be quite another thing to follow House's mantra in a world where <I>each particular cell was also a morally relevant individual</I> (and, it's worth noting, these individuals are completely absent in your decision calculus except as objects for your machinations. They're not even contributing, much less consenting. Indeed, to the extent they are present, it's as objects of scorn who aren't revolting like they should be. Hence, your prescription: turn misery into torture in the hopes that they see your enlightenment).<BR/><BR/>In such a world, it <I>does matter</I> when -- by sickening the body -- you kill off individual cells. And conversely, the reduction in pain to the constituent parts of the body politics -- that is, its citizens -- is a qualitative moral good. To say "well, they're sick anyway" or "they'll probably die eventually" doesn't do justice to the unique human dignity of the individual.<BR/><BR/><I>"You have to remember,"</I> said a priest about an inner city youth, <I>"that for this little boy whom you have met, his life is just as important, to him, as your life is to you. No matter now insufficient or how shabby it may seem to some, it is the only one he has."</I><BR/><BR/>--from Jonathan Kozol, <I>Amazing Grace</I>David Schraubhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04946653376744012423noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post-81136918153691795262008-12-23T14:17:00.000-08:002008-12-23T14:17:00.000-08:00But what such abstractions mask is that when you l...<I>But what such abstractions mask is that when you let the body politic grow sicker, people actually die. This isn't a side issue, it's what Mr. Hamelin is counting on: he wants enough people to die so that the underclass finally gets fed up and launches the revolution. Such calls, you might notice, are far easier to make when your own life isn't on the line.</I><BR/><BR/>You apparent do not understand what <A HREF="http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/palliative?jss=0" REL="nofollow">palliative</A> means. Are you illiterate or just plain stupid?Larry Hamelinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08788697573946266404noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post-58505576084390924992008-12-23T05:44:00.000-08:002008-12-23T05:44:00.000-08:00It's just the old eggs getting cracked for the sak...It's just the old eggs getting cracked for the sake of the omelet; we've been down this road before. Every time someone tries to convince me that Communism in Russia was an aberration, I see something showing just how little respect the putative American vanguard would have for human life and dignity. I'm just glad the revolution in America is an ivory tower fantasy, without the ability to destroy the lives of the people they "fight for."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post-948788169770449512008-12-22T21:55:00.000-08:002008-12-22T21:55:00.000-08:00So what this boils down to is that radical leftist...So what this boils down to is that radical leftists are poor judges of the best routes of alleviating inequality and repression. Which, when you think about it, is unsurprising.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04268585506327621265noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post-44265359552755419022008-12-22T18:24:00.000-08:002008-12-22T18:24:00.000-08:00That empirical-historical question aside, I agree ...That empirical-historical question aside, I agree with David on his substantive points about both the nature of Republican-v-Democrat policy AND the ethical question of supporting one over the other.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post-26892590582687506222008-12-22T18:23:00.000-08:002008-12-22T18:23:00.000-08:00Is there anything beyond "smug self-assurance" tha...Is there anything beyond "smug self-assurance" that convinces our apostate that given a certain excessive amount of kicks taken while down, a threshold of abuse forgone, that the American people will say, like a big Rousseauian Twisted Sister cover band, "We're not gonna take it!" ? <BR/><BR/>Because I'm way unconvinced. <BR/><BR/>Here are some alternatives (they aren't mutually exclusive):<BR/><BR/>An increasingly oligarchical and imperialist government amasses further power, but no revolution succeeds because the coercive power of the state reaches a point that is sufficient to crush the puny rebellions of leftist bloggers and people who think Zizek makes good points.<BR/><BR/>An increasingly oligarchical and imperialist government amasses further power, but no revolution occurs because the sufficiently rich and powerful buy into the new world order and sell out the dispossessed here and in the third world. Media barons, capitalist war profiteers - the usual Injustice League types.<BR/><BR/>An increasingly oligarchical and imperialist government amasses further power, but no revolution occurs because people are too timid to join a revolutionary movement, they've been indoctrinated into middle-class complacency, besides, they're too afraid and they've been down so long they don't know what up feels like no more.<BR/><BR/>And so on. The Che schmucks seem convinced that the only possible response to obvious oppression and abuse is revolt. But a very obvious and easy response is fear, hopelessness, complicity and repression. See: Belarus. And y'know, at least a few other places. If all we need is transparent cruelty from the suits n' senators, plus a broad base of pissed-looking people to chase the Frankenstein fucks up the windmill, well, dammit, why the hell has an obviously dictator-y dictator ever stayed in power for more than two minutes?<BR/><BR/>Here's the sarcasm-free moral, Mr. apostate: When you've got a chance to make things better, even only a little for a few people, you take it. Because you never know when it'll be too late to move in the other direction. Solidarity, comrade, but try not to embarrass yourself.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post-16514617541825629802008-12-22T18:13:00.000-08:002008-12-22T18:13:00.000-08:00I don't buy it. Sorry, but I don't. For people aro...I don't buy it. Sorry, but I don't. For people around the world, too, more people die in GOP admins than in Democratic ones. Women die due to the global gag rule. That's a GOP initiative. Even if you're skeptical that Obama will get us out of Iraq (a skepticism I don't share), it's pretty clear he wouldn't have gotten us into it (and won't get us into the next): that saves lives.<BR/><BR/>The point is, once you accept that Democrats are even incrementally superior to Republicans (and I think they're well more than that), the marginal cost of not supporting them comes in the form of graveyards. Particularly when the proposed alternative is a speculative revolution that you a) can't guarantee will happen, b) can't guarantee will succeed, c) can't guarantee will have the type of politics you want (a point you made in your follow up post about the distinct lack of feminism in many of these movements) and d) is <I>dependent</I> on making the already wretched even more miserable, I don't find the argument even remotely compelling -- indeed I find it extraordinarily disturbing and the product of those lucky enough to be insulated from its costs.David Schraubhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04946653376744012423noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post-3776364320852254452008-12-22T17:55:00.000-08:002008-12-22T17:55:00.000-08:00You aren't saying anything I wasn't saying in the ...You aren't saying anything I wasn't saying in the post you trackbacked this to. And Larry gets it - he and I have this conversation often. I fall slightly to the right of that argument and he falls slightly to the left of it. And we both see both sides.<BR/><BR/>It can't be denied that his point is valid, and even, perhaps, more accurate even if you take into account the "but people are dying!" argument.<BR/><BR/>Consider this: The longer we in the US rely on palliatives, the more people die <I>around the world</I> through the continuation of American imperialist goals (which are continued under Democrats as much as under Republicans).<BR/><BR/>So a revolutionary could truthfully make the argument that through your support of palliative measures at home, <B>actual people are dying abroad.</B><BR/><BR/>The only choice is: short term for us but not for them, or long term for all of us?<BR/><BR/>I'm not saying it's easy, but your smug self-assurance isn't warranted any more than that of the heartless revolutionaries you're deriding.<BR/><BR/>(If that is sounding harsh, sorry - I'm simply not mincing words, I'm not actually upset; I talk this way with Larry too.)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com