[MD] Babylonian intellectuals

[John Carl]

Andy,

My only experience with a tea party'er was  an old feisty, short and skinny
retired teacher, from some NorCal Indian tribe, Gennie, by name, who was on
the board of trustees for DQ and railing against what modern culture has
wrought upon her people, brown and white.

She made some awful strong points about self-reliance and gumption,
describing the contrasts between the world she grew up in, and the world
today.I thought she made a lot of sense from a Pirsigian perspective, "the
re-birth of gumption" was what she was mainly longing for.

And I don't think you can seriously call a life-long teacher,
"anti-academic".

But I do think that is where a spread of new ideas into unlikely circles can
be of help to the world.  That's what I mean by "pruning" instead of trying
to chop the tree down.    It seems to me that the great opposing evil in
this effort, is the media, which portrays the teaparty movement according to
certain ideas and an interpretation that emphasizes the kookier aspects.
 Where actual tp'ers are much more mainstream and frustrated over the
current dualism that gives  spendthrift Republicans and War-mongering
Democrats, both respective cover,  operating under the false assumptions of
reputation.

But back to Gennie, what a pip that woman was.  I remember her talking about
some indian kid walking around with his pants hanging down, hip-hop fashion,
and she wanted to just grab him by the ear and whack him with a ruler, "Pull
your pants UP you idiot.".


> The Tea Party that I saw originally was about the same social values
> Pirsig saw in the Indians (native Americans) in Lila chapter 3:
> opposed to Victorianism, opposed to Socialism, opposed to Fascism,
> opposed to any overbearing social order, opposed to the remote,
> centralized management of private affairs; preferring instead to
> resist codifying an overbearing static social structure, to let social
> values adapt to experience in real time, to allow people to get along
> and live and die and be responsible for their own behavior.
>
> I'm not partisan myself. My political values are mostly antipolitical
> so I can't value any political group highly enough to lend my effort.
> They are all full of shit by nature, or soon will be made so by the
> work of the enemy.
>
> If there were a party like the one I described above, it wouldn't last
> a month. Its refusal to hold its values static results in a refusal to
> hold its meta-values static; it can't hold onto the idea that ideas
> must not be held onto. Any tendency for Dynamic Quality would be too
> loosely held to withstand infiltration by other ruinous ideologies.
> Ever thus to Parties.
>
>
I do believe you are correct, sir.  (Tho I use the "sir" advisedly cuz real
guys don't send e-hugs - especially not to other guys) Ellul posits that the
definition of Satan is "politics".  And literally, it is.  Satan means
"divider".

Personally I'd vote for a new regionalism - forcing people to deal with
their own local issues, and disbanding the federal government enough to
allow for the evolution of natural communities.

But since that ain't gonna happen, I'll just do the next best thing and
ignore the entire apparatus, and I guarantee that if I can successfully
 ignore it, it will go away.



Take care,

John