I don’t know about you, but I find fake, appeasing-the-base bigotry quite a bit more offensive than even the real thing.
Me too. You know, I could dig deep and find respect even for a politician that’s at least meticulously honest, regardless his views. Yes, you guessed it. I’ve gone and said something stupid; because there really is no such thing, anymore. There was a time, perhaps, but honesty has never been much in favor. It’s a distortion of coercion upon a natural human facet.
To explain: this, really, is at the root at our primary universal antagonism of individualism vs. collectivism. Politics is a perfectly valid discipline having to do with individual ethics extended to the society of individuals in which an individual partakes. Further, this is an area where negotiation comes into play. You may have every individual right, but adults — mature, rational adults — weigh all the facts and likely consequences. There is a certain validity to "common" or "greater" good, but such conclusions and resultant actions are wholly subjective, voluntary, and come about principally through a most strange phenomenon: asking nicely.
Radley’s piece is about gays, and my title is about giving it a rest. Can we not just leave this one behind? Please? You know, I have for many years spouted my "live and let live" sort of admonition. But I’d never really been tested on the "gay thing" (and remain to be tested on a few others, perhaps). Not so, anymore. See, we sold our suburban home last year and bought an expensive downtown luxury loft. Gay city. It’s like 1/3 of the community, here, at least. And you know what? I have many new friends. I’ve come to the point where I even hate to name the characterization, because it’s just so irrelevant. Our neighbors across the hall celebrated their 25th anniversary a few months back, an event we (sadly) missed as we were out of town. Only a cold-hearted fucker could find the slightest thing "wrong" with that.
I’m very happy to know some of my new friends; and what sort of genitalia they prefer laying down to bed with seems to me a most idiotic and childish thing to concern one’s self about.
Let me give you a value as concerns judging your fellow human beings, which you ought to do every day of your lives. Ask yourself: are they pursuing their values? Are they striving to be happy? Are they harming anyone else by their values and pursuit of happiness? You can figure out the rest.
Join Over 5,000 Subscribers!
Get exclusive content sent directly to your inbox.
First lets establish that All politicians lie, cheat and steal. OK Now, the gay issue, PLEASE…it's just another way politicians and religious leaders use to divide and conquer. Live and let live……By the way side topic…When we vote I think just as Votes for Bush or Gore go up on the News Screen.. We should also see protest votes tallied to let the politicians know how unhappy we are with them.
Other similar movies are "Bulworth", with Warren Beatty and "Dave" with Kevin Kline. These kind pop up every so often. It's a convenient fantasy that a man who is courageous and ruthlessly honest – usually because he is an outsider and has nothing to lose, no vested interests – can revolutionize the political process.
The myth that this is all based on is that it is corrupt men that have corrupted the political process, and that honest men can redeem it. The truth is that the political process in inherently corrupt due to its own internal contradictions, and that the reason all of the politicians are corrupt is that the process selects for people who are either already corrupt, or who don't have the strength to resist becoming corrupted.
It's not simply that the kinds of people portrayed in these movies could not get elected due to overwhelming opposition – it is that honest men cannot function in such a system. Their own integrity (at least as it is purported to be in the movies) would render them unable to even make a meaningful decision about how to proceed on the simplest of matters.
The process of acting in any way in such a system is itself a corrupt act. Each decision – even on something as trivial as signing the registration papers, or where to make the first campaign stop – is a compromise of principle, and thus diminshing to the integrity of the person. The more significant the decision, the more damaging to integrity.
No one such as Robin Williams character, or Bulworth or Dave, could even get as far as waking up in the morning with the intention of running without already becoming something other than what they were.
I recently got a chance to go watch Robin Williams' "Man of the Year". Granted, it's a made up movie, but he was so forthwright and honest… because he wasn't a politician.
Maybe the next politican shouldn't be a politican at all?