Sunday, March 4, 2012

freemansfarm response log

freemansfarm writes in the comments here that Arthur Silber's rhetoric is less likely to accomplish anything than that of Greenwal (presumably "Greenwald") or Chomsky, because Greenwald, et. al. cannot be called a raver or a ranter.  Response follows:

Greenwald and Chomsky are still called ravers and ranters (probably not here, of course, but plenty of red-staters view them as being as wacky as Michael Savage--and be fair, in many ways, they are), and even if they get to publish a few articles now and then, their token suggestions make it nowhere in terms of affecting policy, other than perhaps adjusting elite dialogue a little bit. In that sense, our country is very Marxist, because all of our leaders try very hard to not be typical Marxist capitalists, and instead talk about humane governance and workers' rights. Same old crap, but dressed up to avoid looking Marxist. As you put it, the world "is the same as it ever was," and in that sense, Greenwald and Chomsky's polite b.s. is just a little frosting on the deathcake. Silber is rude and obscene, but however wrong he might be in approach, he's much more accurate and humane than the other two. It is more decent, realistic and sensible to call Obama an awful fucking child murderer than it is to say, "I have strong reservations about the administration's policy on drone strikes." The latter remark reveals a terrible, compromised humanity, whereas Silber, however unpopular, is at least having a decent human reaction to something that's hideous. Not a "perfect" or "ideal" reaction, but a right one. If someone murders children, as Obama does, we should call them a fucking awful murderer. Soft-spoken articles about adjustments to foreign policy, which get browsed and then ignored at the voting booth by well-educated upper-middle-classers, accomplish nothing except masturbation. That's why Chris Floyd and Arthur Silber are much more tolerable to read than NPR. The world, in the sense that a simpleton might view as the "only" possible sense, could indeed come to an "end." We do have nukes, and someday, we'll have the capability of manipulating space-time such to create a ripple that wipes out everything. Eliminating vile behavior and nurturing generations of good, empathic people, will be the only way to stop future Hitlers and Obamas from nuking the universe and actually ending the world. So, it is that same battle. We're watching only a few threads of it here, but it's somewhat accurate of Silber to liken all these things to the ending of the world (even if he is, to employ his own terminology, an asshole and frequently in error; his writing is still quite worthwhile). Again, verb tense can be employed to save him.

No comments:

Post a Comment