DT said:
... Where they [Pirsig and Goldberg] diverge radically is on the consequences
of this "shift from social domination of intellect to intellectual domination
of society" under Wilson, Hitler, Stalin, and Mussolini. Because believe it or
not they were all trying to do very similar things.
dmb says:
It would be more appropriate to compare FDR to Hitler, Stalin and Mussolini.
Wilson was President a generation earlier than all these other leaders, during
WWI. As Pirsig's analysis goes, he is contrasting FDR's socialism with Hitler's
fascism. Within American politics, the people who hated FDR's New Deal policies
called his a "Commie" and traitor to his class, the Aristocracy. This is what
Pirsig means when he's talking about socialism. That's the historical example
of what an intellectually guided society would actually look like in our
political culture, which is less intense and dramatic than in Europe. And this
is not just some theoretical political spectrum. I mean, the Americans who
hated and condemned FDR were also very likely to be sympathetic toward European
fascism. You'd find portraits of Mussolini in people's homes and there was a
very popular radio preacher who told millions every week what great guy Hitler
is and how that radical lefty FDR had to be stopped. Th
is stuff has been swept under the rug to some extent - not the sort of thing
you learn about in high school history texts but the historical record is there
if you care to look. And if you do look, it's pretty easy to see a continuity
from then until now, with the same very same arguments and attitudes. You'd be
amazed at how a Klansman from the 1920's sounds just like a Militia member or a
neo-Nazi of today. What George Wallace was saying to frighten white voters in
the 1960s is very much what FOX is saying to frighten while voters right now.
Things have hardly changed at all. In fact, just think about what kind of
answers you'd get if you asked a large sample of ditto-heads and Fox fan how
they feel about FDR. I don't even have to tell you what kind of answers you'd
get, right? If we're living in the same reality, you're thinking very few would
have nice things to say and most would express themselves using words like
"socialism" and "communism" in a very unflattering way.
DT said:
His first problem is equating capitalism, an economic theory and practice, with
socialism which is an all encompassing political theory, a part of which is its
economic theory.
dmb says:
I think I know what you mean but it's important to understand that socialism
comes in many shapes and forms but there is one thing they all have in common;
an opposition to unfettered capitalism. Socialism is, in essence, a critical
stance toward pure free markets. Within the context of U.S. politics, that
opposition is predicated on the belief that unregulated capitalism produces
misery and injustice, that it is not consistent with democratic rights and
principles. This is democratic socialism and this is what socialism means in
Western World. I think it's pretty clear that the MOQ wants to endorse
intellectually guided societies along this lines. I mean, it would be unfair
and unreasonable to suggest that Pirsig's intellectually guided society would
be the nightmare version imagined by right-wingers, who equate it with a
Communist Dictatorship like Stalin's or something like that, as if taxation led
directly to the Gulag.
DT said:
The pragmatic PROOF that this is true, is that capitalism has, does, and
continues to work with varying degrees of success under all types of political
systems from dictatorships to democracies.
dmb says:
That just goes to show that capitalism and democracy are not the same thing.
Most South American dictatorships since WWII, for example, have been very
friendly to capitalism.
DT said:
But while it is true that centrally planned socialist or fascist economics kill
dynamic potential; much more importantly RMP's evaluation completely glosses
over the fact that they both include political theories that justify the
extremely dynamic practice of intimidating, imprisoning, or killing anyone who
does or might disagree with any of those theories or practices. Or who are
deemed to have little value to society. All this based on the best possible
"science" of course.
dmb says:
You've lumped socialism and fascism together to criticize Pirsig's analysis
but in that analysis socialism and fascism are opposed terms. According to the
meaning of the term as Pirsig describes it and uses it, "socialism" would
definitely be opposed to killing anyone who disagrees. According to the meaning
of the phrase as Pirsig uses it, an "intellectually guided society" doesn't not
imprison or intimidate anyone for dissenting. In fact, the main idea of an
intellectually guided society is to protect freedom of speech, freedom of
expression, religion, association and the like. I mean, you are equating
socialism with the very worst things, things that it opposes.
DT said:
Both fascism and socialism are based on the crudest form of pragmatism. The
ends justify the means. When I get in power I will define the ends and use any
means available to me to get to them. Even if along the way they turn out not
to be so good. If you don't like that I will get one of my boys to show you the
light. Often by piercing a 9mm hole through your head and your wife's head, and
your kids head, though not necessarily in that order.
dmb says:
Right. Socialism is where they shoot your whole family in the head. That's what
Pirsig means by intellectual guidance. Yea, Gulags and genocide and eugenics.
That's what the MOQ is all about. Gee, that's such an insightful and
informative conclusion. It really must be taken with the utmost seriousness.
You're obviously quite sincere in trying to unlock Pirsig "real" intentions.
Unfortunately for you, however, the record shows a lack of ideological
compliance so I'm afraid you and your family will have to go.
We'll send you a bill for the bullets, by the way.
DT said:
I believe that one of the attractions to you [DMB] in Pirsig's work is that his
liberal biases syncs with yours.
dmb says:
Well, I agree with his analysis and "liberal" does more or less describe my
view but to say we're both biased in the same direction is to say we're both
prejudiced and unfair. How so? As a matter of fact, I learned about
conservatism from conservatives at a conservative college, where I studied
intellectual history. I worked in talk radio, as the producer of a conservative
talk show. I grew up in the church. It's not like I learned about conservatism
from its enemies, which is where you seem to have learned about liberalism. As
with your equation of socialism and bullets through the head, it seems to me
that you are being wildly unfair and hyperbolic and generally distorting Pirsig
analysis beyond all recognition.
If you want to know why there's been so much diversity and disagreement over
the social/intellectual levels and their relationship, just think about the
simple fact that you have equated the very two camps that Pirsig uses as
oppositional points in his analysis; socialism and fascism. If we're going to
have a reasonable discussion about politics, the meaning of these central terms
has to be consistent. If you use the terms to mean the opposite of what it
means in the quotes in question, then there's no way the conversation is ever
going to go anywhere because it'll always be confused and confounded by
contradictory meanings and concepts. It is almost literally a case where the
support for human rights is taken as a road to genocide. Nobody's talking about
central planning of the economy or bullets in the heads of those who are
against it. That's a ridiculous paranoid fantasy and it's outrageously
insulting to pretend any version of the MOQ is in favor of such a thing.
C'mon, Dave. Be serious. That's bullshit and you know it.
_________________________________________________________________
The New Busy is not the too busy. Combine all your e-mail accounts with Hotmail.
http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?tile=multiaccount&ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_4
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org/md/archives.html
