No Keith, That is the intricacies of Democrat politics. That IS different. The Democratic left must include the academics and they certainly are prolific both in writing and thinking things through. They include sociologists, anthropologists, scientists (non-Creationist types with the exception of the scientists who separate their politics from their science rather like Catholic physicists), used to be economists but the Christian right abandoned Jesus and went for an another Jew, Milton Friedman (See Black Baptist Minister member of Congress Julius Caesar Watts) and political theorists.
I don't see the problem as one of being able to "write and think" at all. You and I have made our business in something other than this. Is it surprising that we have learned to see the opposite side of what we grew up believing? God bless the Internet for old cranks like ourselves. Instead I see it as one of being able to write for today's Newspapers which they admit to being on a fifth grade level. If I write like the University taught me which includes understanding theology at least on the simplicity of Karl Barth then I am not understood most of the time. Barth admitted to paradoxical reality while non-linear thought admits to a 360 degree non-linear look at issues. i.e. to describe what is really going on in this government you have to look beyond the linear logicality and into the culture and history on a level too specific for most audiences. Even something as simple as what I wrote you is way too "far out" for today's pundits. They cannot think in patterns but only in simple "bites" that represent about 6 seconds of thought. The average 12 year old "tests" at 12 seconds of concentration. In that world analysis is not an option. History is degraded and yesterday is irrelevant to the moment unless it is found in a book, preferably the Bible or one you can use like the Bible. Maybe it is really the mentality of the auto shop where you must do everything "by the manual." The kind of thinking that ruined Steinway pianos for a generation and only recently brought them back from the Teflon disaster. That is not what the Ivory Tower teaches. As I said, in that world complexity simply means "levels of inability." That, however, is not the world of the Democrats. Their connection to publishing and academia, including today's scientific studies of complexity. It makes them able to work in a very verbally dense medium. You would not have had any trouble getting the "Clintonites" to understand and answer what you have said. What is always confusing about these "dudes" is that 1. they are not manipulatible by ordinary means, 2. as Dick Morris pointed out about Clinton, his model was not a straight path but more resembled "tacking" in sailing or switchbacks in the path up a mountain, and 3. again as Morris (a Republican) pointed out, that "hearing", "understanding" and "agreeing" did not mean that these "New Democrats" would do what you wanted. 4. It meant that their relationship to time was totally different from the more linear and I believe more stupid "Republican Model" which collapses time. Can anyone believe that we have only had two years of Bush? 5. Clinton worked slowly after he made the initial mistake on Health Care and then realized that he could do nothing about it. (Sailing into a Hurricane with nothing but sails for power.) 6. Clinton dropped a lot of bombs but never got the credit here for being "warlike." He was a Democrat and Democrats only do it to "wag the dog." Republicans "mean it." He also did as much as Bush, but quietly, and to the same lack of effect on Terrorism. With Clinton the Army was a "Peacekeeper" while with Bush they are "Warriors." Do you remember those stupid uniforms that cost so much for the White House guards? Nixon wanted "warriors" in front of the White House like the Queen had. The public laughed and they disappeared. The old line Republicans that I studied with have little in common with these former Dixiecrat Republican Warriors today. Actually the old ones were personally more fierce but not nationally frightening. Today's Republicans are crazy with their internal conflicts of interest from business to race while the Democrats are more and more separated from the labor base that doesn't have the intellectual training nor stamina to hear what they are saying. That base is abandoned by the Republican wealth but also abandoned by the Democrat "Ivory Tower." Their only help is "counseling" and that comes from the church on one hand and the secular business, therapy and 12 step programs on the other. What JC used the Coliseum for in another day. It is a confused time with very little consistency of culture. I'm afraid more so than any of the times when the Soviets and America only provided two buttons to push for destruction. It seems no one believes in Democracy or the ability to achieve unity beyond national human sacrifices like 9/11. Ray Evans Harrell ----- Original Message ----- From: "Keith Hudson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Ray Evans Harrell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, September 02, 2002 3:35 PM Subject: Senile decay (was Re: Walking on eggshells > Ray, > > Ah well . . there we are. Although my economic views are probably close to > those of fairly right-wing Republicans -- and certainly to the right of the > present Tory party in England -- if I were American it's likely that I > would vote for them as often as I've voted Tory. That is, never. > > Mind you, until I joined Futurework, I was a fairly middle-of-the-road > leftie-type liberal, reader of The Guardian and all that. Equivalent to > your Democrats I suppose. But then, having had to think things through and, > moreoever write about them, it's become quite educative. What I find > disconcerting about lefties -- now that I'm an ex-, that is -- is that > they're very prolific at criticism, but never quite seem to be able to > construct their own case. > > But there we are . . . you needn't take much notice . . . I'm probably > going senile anyway. > > Keith > > > At 13:12 02/09/02 -0400, you wrote: > >Keith, > > > >You are just beginning to discover the intricacies of Republican Politics. > >If you think this is something, you should have been in Washington during > >the Nixon era. Republicans like war. But they have to have the country > >behind them for them to enjoy it. They have been angry at the Democrats > >for seventy years about: > > > >1. The Democrats stopping the Depression by WW II. > > > >2. Pre-empting them on Civil Rights although some Republicans walked with > >the Democrats in the Marches, Civil Rights was largely a Democrat affair in > >the sixties even though the Republican party had a deep history of civil > >rights from the Civil War forward. However they lost it in the early > >sixties. > > > >3. They absorbed the most racist arm of the Democrat party (Dixiecrats) left > >the Democrats during the Civil Rights marches and joined the Republicans > >with Nixon. They also took the hit on Martin Luther King's assignation. > > > >4. The disgrace of Watergate, > > > >5. Iran-Contra, even though an old Republican (Judge Walsh) was the most > >damning on the California and Southern branch of the Party. Remember that > >the Contras were funded by very suspect drug money with the drugs eventually > >reaching the streets of the Black ghetto in LA. (Not many of those old > >'Walsh' Republicans left, remember the elder Bush was not one, he was a CIA > >spook who also loved war, as was the editor of the National Review William > >Buckley. Most of these folks long for the Cold War and the duality of > >"us vs. them." They don't do well with complexity but they are into > >covert special operations. It seems clear today that the Republicans are > >the first party to market a President who was exhibiting the first signs of > >Alzheimer's. As proof of this, they use it as an excuse for him coming > >out FOR the National Endowment of the Arts in the last two years of his > >administration. (This mirrored the Democrat fiasco with Wilson during the > >old issue of the League of Nations when his wife and cabal ran the country > >into the ground.) > > > >6. The sex scandals that deposed the liberal wing of the Republican > >Congress > > > >7. Bill Clinton's seeming ability to absorb all of their worst traits and > >still function through the power of his education and intelligence. > > > >8. Ending up on the opposite side of the last election from what they > >believed. They were convinced that Bush would win the popular vote and > >lose in the electoral college. Chris Matthews wrote in one of the > >Republican Jewish rags what the "game plan" was. It was exactly the same > >as Gore eventually used. They planned to make Gore suspect for this four > >years and to subvert the economy through powerful partisanship developed > >through the Cable and Radio Media. They haven't quite caught their pace > >since they ended up on the reverse side with a minority elected President. > > > >So why wouldn't they be a bit confused. I would say that they have a > >number of un-resolved issues that pollutes their action today as they > >continually see the present through the dark vision of these actions in the > >past. > > > >Ray Evans Harrell > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > -------------- > > Keith Hudson,6 Upper Camden Place, Bath BA1 5HX, England > Tel:01225 312622/444881; Fax:01225 447727; E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ________________________________________________________________________
