[MD] On Indian Values (Part I?)

[Arlo J. Bensinger]

[Platt]
You missed smoking illegal peyote...

[Arlo]
Which we replaced with drinking legal whiskey. Actually, I think this falls
under "subordination to authority", since what you really mean is that they
won't "conform the authority of others who tell them what they can and can't
do". Right?

[Platt]
... taking off for days on "vision quests"...

[Arlo]
Taking vacations is an Indian value "unfitted for modern life"? You're reaching
here, old man. Actually, again, what you really mean here is "punctuality",
since it can't be simple "vacations", but the fact that they won't conform to
"taking them off at scheduled times, approved by the  human resources manager".
Right?

[Platt]
... and a "dangerous willingness to sudden and enormous violence" as unsuited to
modern American life.

[Arlo]
Fair enough. I'll give you this one. Although the passage you mention with this
value was Pirsig describing how this was a COWBOY trait that was taken from the
Indian, and was referring to the Sundance Kid about the engage in a showdown.
SO, at ONE point, anyways, this value was seen as not only as "fitted for
modern life", but was actively and positively encouraged in cowboy films. Tell
me, when did we stop valuing the cowboy and the Sundance Kid, and the Western
hero to whom this passage referred? 

But referring me to that passage, led me to this immediately following.

"But the point of Phaedrus' thesis was that the reason [cowboy films personifing
Indians] came "naturally" and that audiences responded to it "naturally" was
that the film reached into a root source of American feelings for what is good.
**It is this source of what is good, this historic cultural system of American
values, which is Indian**."

Thanks for that, its a good passage.

[Platt]
Another case of Marxist thinking in which contrary facts are ignored in  order
to promote a socialist agenda.

[Arlo]
Oh, geez, Platt. There you had an attempt at actual substance and you follow it
up with... fear and ad hominem. But now that you've accused me (again) of
ignoring "contrary facts", perhaps you can answer this.

You ignore, or outright dismiss, everyhing Pirsig wrote that does not conform to
your Party Ideology. You dismiss ZMM, you dismiss 98% of his writings on the
Indians, you dismiss the role of peyote in the creative process that gave us
Lila, you dismiss the emergentist nature of the MOQ levels... tell me, how dare
you accuse ME of "ignoring contrary facts" when to date you have *maybe* 3 or 4
sentances that, although I hardly ignore, I weigh against the bulk of
everything else the man wrote, the bulk which YOU ignore as "contrary fact" to
your "conservative agenda".

So, in the interest of fairnesss, I offer this. You accuse me (constantly) of
being a "socialist", and yet I've repeatedly stated I favor and value a free
market. Can you tell me ONE THING that you accept from Pirsig that IS OPPOSED
to your "conservative agenda"? One thing? You have a lot to choose from here,
since you dismiss outright around 7/10 of his writings for their "contrary to
conservatismness".

In the meantime, I think it is also fair to say that your accusations of my
"ignoring contrary facts" is genuinely funny, if not evidence of the woeful
hypocrisy of those who are really nothing more than Party Jesters.

Arlo