me:
What is this "rational politics"? who believes in it and what are its tenets?

Leigh:
My employer describes part of 'rational politick' well when I discuss
world affairs with him. Essentially, there's nothing he can do about
3/4 million dead Iraqis, so just go on with 'business (and social
mores) as usual, and he LIKES IT like that.

why is this creep relevant to pen-l discussions? is there anyone on
this list who is like this? (David S is a conservative, but I don't
think he fits this category.) If there's no-one on the list who's like
this, preaching against their perspectives here seems like spitting
into the wind.

me:
> ... Be SPECIFIC rather than dishing out more vague generalizations.

Leigh:
In Hannah Arendts' AND Ward Churchill's terms "...mass murderers out
of a society's individuals" are the Eichmanns of which they spoke
philosophically or directly. ...

...as currently practiced, their 'union' is part of the 'mass
murderous' problem, and has no solutions for American society... just
'bennies' for a microscopic number of it's population IF they don't
care about their work's impact on the rest of the world.

is there anyone on this list who is like this? why argue against the
(so-called) "little Eichmann's" point of view if it's not represented
here. Nobody on pen-l likes that point of view, as far as I know. To
rail against it is simple self-indulgent preaching to the choir. (BTW,
I hope that you don't think that the "little Eichmanns" in the Twin
Towers deserved to die. Didn't Churchill repudiate that term?)

Me:
Or is this simply an argument that "since everyone else is fucktup,
it's okay for 'angry anarchists' to be that way"?

Leigh:
OK.

Me:
what crap!

Leigh:
You say... I consider theoretical marxism to be intellectual diarrhea,
or constipation. So?

So? I was simply repeating myself. the "everyone else is fuktup"
argument is nothing but the bogus "two wrongs make a right" view that
burning a bank down somehow solves the problem that banks create for
the world.

I'd like to see _why_ you think theoretical Marxism to be intellectual
diarrhea or (contradictorily) constipation. Are you saying that no
theory is necessary, that you don't need a weatherman to know which
way the wind is blowing, that thinking with one's blood is enough? Or
do you have a better theory?

Me:
> BTW, the "angry anarchist" is not the opposite of the authoritarian despot. 
They share a tremendous amount.

Leigh:
Yup! ...and it's up to others who believe the world can be a better
more humane place to point that out to them... not dun them or vilify.
That's why I was never in a 'vanguard' (sneer).

so you don't run around burning ATM machines, like those
anarcho-vanguardists in Greece?

Leigh: >>>There's ALWAYS some way to blow things up.

Me:
will there ALWAYS be idiots who believe that blowing things up is a
way to solve problems?

Leigh:
Yes... But I'm not one of them. Blowing things up is just one tactic
of many at appropriate times and places to solve some SPECIFIC
problem.

then why do you glorify those idiots in Greece?
--
Jim Devine /  "if there's an original thought out there, I could use
it right now." -- Bob Dylan & Sam Shepherd.

Reply via email to