My OperaLife imitates insane drivel.
Thursday, January 17, 2008 8:48:14 PM
To help answer the timeless question: "can complex philosophical questions be illuminated by cheap superficial displays of archetypes battling against each other", let's examine this curious idea described to me by one of my friends the other day.
The idea is this (..basically): in the ongoing presidential races - and in politics generally - what we are seeing... although it appears to be just drivel and insanity, driven to various peaks of orgasmic frenzy through the perversely symbiotic relationship between politicians and the equally whimsical press- corps... is really just a cover for the hugely important battles between opposing philosophies towards government, and the direction of America in the future.
I've.. touched on this idea before. And charitably described /some/ elements of the frenzied insanity as reflecting (not describing or interacting with) a particular meme in american culture when it comes to the idea of a father- figure, or a leader, battling a community spirit and individuality. Because this is something universal across the country, and most have that duality in- built, so to speak. So it's typically easy to relate any conflict to that sort of thing. Many cultures have these, and it's often difficult not to stumble upon them (whether you're indigenous or not
).
But that's not what is going on here. What we have is a conscious effort by this individual to find meaning in the manufactured narratives the current front- runners are peddling in (or are helped with by the press- corps).
And.. I can't help but wonder - how far is it possible to stretch the rubber- band, you know? I mean, I used to be a communist - so I don't laugh of people who genuinely believe crap is going to save the world (so they see it, anyway). But to find salvation (and I use that biblical reference carefully for this occasion) in the radiant stupidity some of the candidates are shifting at the moment? To such an extent that they're willing to suggest there is some sort of epic showdown of ideas going on here?
I mean, full marks for effort, but face it - you've got the choice between elites who can hardly be held back from ruining the economy, starting a war with Iran, and biting off international relations even more than it has been at the moment. And between privileged people who can probably be held back from invading countries at random, ruining the economy, and pushing international relations on the trash- heap for good.
There's no leader going to sprout out of the inherent american goodness to fix that, so you can sit back on your ass and be happy about how great your country is, all right?
Sheesh.
Anyway - so I guess the answer to the timeless question is - perhaps. But not without a lot of effort. And my advice would be not to waste that effort on appearances only. (You damned bastard.)
The idea is this (..basically): in the ongoing presidential races - and in politics generally - what we are seeing... although it appears to be just drivel and insanity, driven to various peaks of orgasmic frenzy through the perversely symbiotic relationship between politicians and the equally whimsical press- corps... is really just a cover for the hugely important battles between opposing philosophies towards government, and the direction of America in the future.
I've.. touched on this idea before. And charitably described /some/ elements of the frenzied insanity as reflecting (not describing or interacting with) a particular meme in american culture when it comes to the idea of a father- figure, or a leader, battling a community spirit and individuality. Because this is something universal across the country, and most have that duality in- built, so to speak. So it's typically easy to relate any conflict to that sort of thing. Many cultures have these, and it's often difficult not to stumble upon them (whether you're indigenous or not
).But that's not what is going on here. What we have is a conscious effort by this individual to find meaning in the manufactured narratives the current front- runners are peddling in (or are helped with by the press- corps).
And.. I can't help but wonder - how far is it possible to stretch the rubber- band, you know? I mean, I used to be a communist - so I don't laugh of people who genuinely believe crap is going to save the world (so they see it, anyway). But to find salvation (and I use that biblical reference carefully for this occasion) in the radiant stupidity some of the candidates are shifting at the moment? To such an extent that they're willing to suggest there is some sort of epic showdown of ideas going on here?
I mean, full marks for effort, but face it - you've got the choice between elites who can hardly be held back from ruining the economy, starting a war with Iran, and biting off international relations even more than it has been at the moment. And between privileged people who can probably be held back from invading countries at random, ruining the economy, and pushing international relations on the trash- heap for good.
There's no leader going to sprout out of the inherent american goodness to fix that, so you can sit back on your ass and be happy about how great your country is, all right?
Sheesh.
Anyway - so I guess the answer to the timeless question is - perhaps. But not without a lot of effort. And my advice would be not to waste that effort on appearances only. (You damned bastard.)
