[MD] Another parallel

[MarshaV]

Greetings DMB,

I'm such a complainer, aren't I?

At 03:01 PM 7/12/2009, you wrote:


>Marsha said to dmb:
>
>I agree with John.  This post seemed to me to be your social level 
>political opinion propped up with MoQ rhetoric, and it didn't 
>work.  Statements like "everybody knows", "The conservatives think", 
>"The liberals think" "Obviously," are what???  Baloney.  Who do you 
>think you have the ability to speak for???
>
>dmb replies:
>Your reaction strikes me as quite unfair and unreasonable. I was 
>talking about "a typical point of contention between the left and 
>right", one that is "in the news these days" and that's why 
>"everybody knows where the two parties stand". A person can easily 
>claim to know what "the conservatives think" and what "the liberals 
>think" because conservatives and liberals are out there in 
>newspapers, magazines, books, on television, radio and the internet 
>telling us what they think. How is it possible to live in this world 
>and not know what they think? How does being aware of a public 
>debate constitute "baloney"? Seriously, I don't get it.

I do not accept or believe the talking-political-mediaheads, nor do I 
think they represent either an intellectual point-of-view or the 
majority of citizens.  What they spit out is celebrity and propaganda 
and I'm surprised you're buying it.  I do not accept either the grand 
sweeping generalizations, doublespeak or the soundbytes.   Actual 
individuals that I bump into hold a combination of both "liberal" and 
"conservatives" patterns.  The conservatives and liberals that are 
filling newspapers, magazines, television screens and radio I'd 
classify as mostly political entertainers, to my mind they preen, 
sermonize and babble.  I do not care what they think because they do 
not think for me.   The public debate represented by the media is a farce.



>The quotes from Pirsig have been conveniently dished up side by side 
>with my reading of them. If you think I'm only using them to prop up 
>my own opinions, wouldn't it be a simple matter to offer an 
>alternative reading and/or a critique of my reading? Isn't that what 
>I've been inviting all along, a fair and honest reading of the MOQ's 
>political analysis? Can you make a case that Pirsig is NOT saying 
>the Victorians, neo-Victorians and fascists subordinate intellect to 
>society? Can you make a case that Pirsig is NOT saying human rights, 
>socialism and the New Deal are programs for the intellectual control 
>of society? Those quotes are on the table for anyone to read and 
>interpret. Go ahead, knock yourself out. I'd be amazed to see such a case.


I've been around long enough to know that Mr. Pirsig's words can be 
used to support and criticize both conservative & liberal issues, and 
depends somewhat on the rhetorical skill or belligerence of the 
poster.  I tend to stick with RMP's criticism of both and think it is 
time to move forward to something new.  I have seen nothing fair and 
honest, or forward looking from either political camps in this 
forum.  Please don't ask me to prove a negative, or debate social 
nonsense, I will not play such a losers game.

Having spoken my political peace, I really like your posts on the 
MOQ, Radical Empiricism, Pragmatism, the mythos and mysticism.  I 
find them all very interesting and look forward to reading more.

I am still one of your biggest fans.


Marsha

















"Compassion diminishes fright about your own pain and increases inner 
strength." ~His Holiness, the Dalai Lama