There's a lot to [dis]agree with, here. >8^D But I'll start with the thing I mostly
agree with: the damage being done to our culture is a function of the language we use. I
don't think Trump or his ilk are the cause, though. They're the symptom. The cause is
electronic communication. "Innovation" like email, usenet, html, ..., facebook,
twitter, 4chan, etc. has altered our language and, hence, altered our minds. Say what you
will about Trump (or Guy Fieri or whoever), they're modern creatures.
Now to the 3 parts I fundamentally disagree with:
0) Political Correctness isn't even close to fascist. Political correctness
(even run amok) is simply the attempt to empathize with one's audience. Is it
fascist to have good manners? ... to care about the person you're talking
to/about as if they were a person deserving of respect? No, clearly that's not
fascist at all. I can sympathize with the idea that nobody's perfect and we
all fail to respect everyone always. But the overwhelming majority of us _try_
to be respectful most of the time. And if we see someone (like Trump) failing
_all_ the time, it's right to shame them for their lack of respect. When you
meet these hypersensitive people who seem like all they do is shame others for
disrespect, it's useful to consider the electronic comm. dominance. They see
nothing but hate and nastiness online all the time and are making some attempt
to combat it. Cheers to those hypersensitive people. I wish I could be more
sensitive.
1) We are not limiting our thoughts to the 2 choices. It seems to me that most
people are upset with either choice and are voting according to whatever
strategy they hold. It's multi-objective optimization projected down onto a
lower dimensional space. The only way voting for a known-to-lose candidate
supports an objective is as a protest vote or because you place ideology above
practice. (... barring the 5% funding objective, which is a bit obscure) Both
of those perspectives are fine. But few of us are really that ideological.
Most US citizens are moderates. To read these votes as a purely disjoint
bifurcation in all voter _thought_ is too strong.
2) I'm not hearing a herd mentality towards the presidential vote. I'm hearing
"Fine, I'll vote for that one, but will keep supporting my ideological champions so
that we can still make progress over the next 4 years." This is the case for my
vote. I voted for Stein in 2012 because I didn't really care who won. Romney and Ryan
are rational people. They'd have done a fine job. I had to vote for Obama in 2008
because: Palin. But if McCain had picked a rational person, I would have voted Green or
Libertarian. The same is true this time around. I think Pence is a fine candidate. If
Trump weren't on the ticket, I'd vote for Jill. This reasoning is not as you caricature.
I'm not avoiding voting for Stein because nobody else is. I voted for Clinton because
a) nobody irrational is on her ticket and b) she's the most competent candidate.
On 11/08/2016 04:16 PM, Steven A Smith wrote:
Glen -
I appreciate the nuance here.
I have been dealing with crypto-fascists all of my life... we have discussed the
libertarian vs the Libertarian, I have endured the years where Lefty political
correctness was approaching fascism and I have had to endure the Righty style fascism
that seems to be hitting a crescendo under the rallying cry of that "man-child"
running for president.
I isolate myself enough in daily life so as NOT to have to spend too many
cycles on this constant interpretation, for those who do not have that luxury,
I understand that this can be deeply painful to the psyche if not the soul.
I refer you to the musical observations of the philosophers known as "They Might be
Giants":
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ow-nuHCTA5E
Unfortunately, *I* believe that the language we use in our communication deeply
informs the language we use to think... and that by adjusting our discourse
with others can lead us to think (for better or worse) differently. I believe
that the damage being done to our culture today is as much the way our thinking
is modified by this presidential race as it is the possible outcomes. We are
leading ourselves to believe that our only two choices are to become a
xenophobic, retrograde, bigoted people or to continue with a status quo which
is clearly not serving many, many people very well.
While I don't completely agree with or support Jill and the Greens, I DO
appreciate the alternative rhetoric they have offered. Her *very* low polling
indicates to me that either *many* of us really aren't willing to think outside
of one of the two boxes offered to us, OR, there is something specifically
wrong with their message that *I* am not getting?
What I hear pretty exclusively is "I won't vote for them because nobody else is voting for
them" or maybe even more pointedly "I won't listen to them because nobody else is
listening to them".
--
☣ glen
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
