Don't we have better things to talk about?

[meus-ovatio.livejournal.com]

I hear a lot people talk about "being political". Yet all they seem to talk about is:

Did you hear what Rush Limbaugh said?
Did you hear what Ann Coulter said?
Did you hear what happened at the Tea Party Convention?
Did you know that this one guy was mean to another guy?
Have you seen the latest thing on the Fox News?
OMG Jon Stewart totally pwned some guy!

Wait, what happened to the politics? It is strange that as a country we devote a considerable amount of our time and energy into arguing about who we/each other are. But what does that have to do with politics? Have we become so atrophied by identity-issues that we are confusing one for the other? What is the most important thing here? Whether or not side X are really like the Nazis? Whether or not we are the best side?

I don't get it. Can someone help me out here?

Comments

[hardblue.livejournal.com]

It may be the nature of the forum. I imagine most people go through these LJ pages for a few minutes diversion. I'm actually impressed with what one does find here - a lot of bored, restless people, I guess. ;)

[meus-ovatio.livejournal.com]

I'm not speaking so much about this forum specifically. In general, we devote air-time and dollars to arguing about the word "socialist", for instance. Who cares, really? Am I socialist? I don't know, am I? So?

[hardblue.livejournal.com]

Perhaps my observation extends to the general public as well. Most of us are not professionally engaged in politcs, so that a lot of the general discussion is thin and more saucy than substantive. As for those who are more seriously engaged, such as the Teabaggers, they may find it useful to keep the subject down to its lowest common denominaotor, and just try to hit the 'fear' buttons, if it will help to move the polls and get people to vote their way.

Yes, you are...

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

... a socialist. Everyone is a socialist of one stripe or another. Even people who claim that they are against "socialism" espouse a social policy of a sort.

[mahnmut.livejournal.com]

I assume you haven't checked through the hall of fame (http://community.livejournal.com/talk_politics/tag/recommended) yet, then?

[hardblue.livejournal.com]

I was speaking of LJ in general. In LJ, this community and its progenitor, politics forum, may be the most substantive, more than enough for me, that's for sure, and it's probably on a par higher than what we find on the 24-7 cable news channels. But there is so much more to be fathomed, and we can be humbled that we (the collective 'we', not just the LJ 'we') don't do much more than scratch the surface, as is suggested by the fact that a comedy show like Jon Stewart's "Daily Show" is such a prime source of political information.

[pastorlenny.livejournal.com]

Apparently "political" means "pertaining to partisan opinions." This is also news to me.

[mahnmut.livejournal.com]

That's why I try not to take part in those so-called 'discussions' where people basically say Hi! I'm Joe/Sue/Mike/Anne. I'm socialist/communist/liberal/conservative/libertarian. This is so awesome! Do you like how much I'm socialist/communist/liberal/conservative/libertarian? (http://mahnmut.livejournal.com/138539.html)

[debergerac.livejournal.com]

in before someone mentions palin or hitler...

[dukexmachismo.livejournal.com]

in before Godwin reference and pedantic correction of Godwin reference.

[debergerac.livejournal.com]

mille grazie.

[htpcl.livejournal.com]

In with an icon of Herr Flick from 'Allo 'Allo.

Idea for my next post

[dukexmachismo.livejournal.com]

"hi, I'm A Nazi! Who else here is a Nazi? Also, which one of you is Rene Artois?"

[htpcl.livejournal.com]

U stoopit wumun!

[kenderkin.livejournal.com]

Unfortunately, I think that most Americans are more interested in the latest reality show that actually learning more about civics and what's really going on in the world around them.

[majortom-thecat.livejournal.com]

I deleted my other attempt because the picture came out really big. Sorry!

[dukexmachismo.livejournal.com]

GMTA

[dukexmachismo.livejournal.com]

Have we become so atrophied by identity-issues that we are confusing one for the other?


"A thousand people in the street
Singing songs and carrying signs
Mostly say, hooray for our side."

[mijopo.livejournal.com]

Political activity has always involved denigrating one's opponent, because much about politics is about gaining power and denigration is a useful way to gain power. I don't think that's so hard to understand.

Now, if you're saying that you'd like *this* community to move beyond that sort of stupid bullshit, e.g., not make largely contentless posts like this: http://community.livejournal.com/talk_politics/493070.html, well, yes, I'm totally with you.

[meus-ovatio.livejournal.com]

I understand that it has always involved such, but has it always involved the vast majority of such?

[mijopo.livejournal.com]

I don't know if the vast majority does, hard to quantify such things. I suspect, though, that cable TV and the internet has done a lot to both increase the amount of rancor and illuminate it.

The vast majority...

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

... don't waste time in political fora. They have too many important things to do.

[readherring.livejournal.com]

Yes, we need more of

Did you hear what Keith Olberman said?

If you're going to argue that politics is just regurgitation of side x vs. side y, why not make a little effort to be bipartisan?

Polarizing discussion along a bipolar us-vs-them axis makes it easier to control.

[squidb0i.livejournal.com]

An idea as old as tribes themselves.

Push the idea that one belongs on one side of the center point or the other, apply a little bit of identity politicking, toss in a handful of wedge issues..

Often the end result, yes.

[squidb0i.livejournal.com]

Makes one wonder what the endgame is for the GOP and other backers behind the TeaParty when it fails to regain them their lost power..

Re: I'm finding this answer more and more unpalatable as it becomes more and more apt

[squidb0i.livejournal.com]

lol.. well played


(God I hope you're wrong.. )

Oh, you mean somewhere else.

[squidb0i.livejournal.com]

Yeah, that would suck too. =[

[technocratic.livejournal.com]

We are intellectually lazy and would rather go for the low-hanging fruit of political entertainment than delve into the deeper issues.

That tendency is not limited to politics.

[tridus.livejournal.com]

Understanding issues is hard. It's hard at the best of times, and really hard when dealing with a public that has an attention span measured in seconds.

So, when your goal is to win, are you going to try to explain how a policy will accomplish some goal? Or are you going to say "<random talking head who opposes me > is a worthless <liberal/facist/commie/airhead>!"


Something that has really stuck with me over the years is people here in Canada who wanted more health spending. They said they "wanted more health spending, even if it meant running a deficit" in huge numbers. When asked, most of them had no idea what "deficit" means.

They don't know what it is, but by gollie they sure do want more of it! When you're a political operative working in that kind of climate, your options for anything resembling intelligent discussion are limited.

(A similar case was on a poll I got called for. The government had put out a report titled "the road to self sufficiency." The pollster asked what I knew about it, and I said that I'd heard of it but hadn't read it, which was one of their options. The next question was "do you agree with the report's recommendations?"

Now, you'd think that me just saying that I hadn't read the report would make the answer pretty obvious. You'd be wrong. Not only was it not obvious, the answer "I have no idea because I haven't read the report" wasn't even an option. Unsurprisingly when the results came out, people were overwhelmingly in favor of the report. People also overwhelmingly knew absolutely nothing about what the report actually said. But it's hard to be against it when the title is about self sufficiency, right?)

[yes-justice.livejournal.com]

Hey, its a step up from cannibalism.

[robertainnc.livejournal.com]

Eh, I suppose it depends on where one goes to "talk" about politics.

Lately I've been enjoying the discussions and analysis over at Open Left (http://www.openleft.com/), for example. A good blend of thoughtful progressive politics...a few recent posts that struck me, for example, were Progressive Populism and the Business Community (http://openleft.com/diary/18278/progressive-populism-and-the-business-community), which acknowledges we're not going to get out of this recession without big business playing a role, and how the progressive community may want to think about approaching that issue, given it's historic perspective on corporate owners vs. workers...another was On Meta-Left Discussions: no Substitute for Organizing People and Marshalling Resources (http://openleft.com/diary/18167/on-metaleft-discussions-no-substitute-for-organizing-people-and-marshalling-resources), which looked at the common journalistic meme regarding the ineffectiveness of the American left, puts the meme itself into context, and boils the reality down to--if you truly want to effect positive progressive change in your lifetime, for your own life and the lives of all those to come, there's no resting on your laurels. The work doesn't stop.

And that's just one site. Certainly there's plenty of sites that descend into political gossip, the kind you note above. But there are just as many that are doing really thoughtful writing, excellent analysis, and really pushing the progressive envelope. What we pick and choose to read is in our hands.

[majortom-thecat.livejournal.com]

I don't know why, but the political identity thing is very important to some people. My Grandma, for example, doesn't always remember her own last name but she never forgets that she is a Democrat.

[paft.livejournal.com]

Well, the Tea Party movement is currently the face of the Republican party. It's the likes of Limbaugh and Beck who are now calling the tune of the GOP.

That affects every issue, foreign and domestic.

[the-rukh.livejournal.com]

I think you're embellishing a little bit. It's not just 'what limbaugh said', its 'what limbaugh said about X political thing' and 'the thing on fox news about political event or decision Y (which will eat your children and rape your puppies)'

People have sources for their news, just the way it is. When talking about politics, news and the political implications, or the actual event of politics are as important as talking about political theory or ideology, sometimes more.

Render unto Caesar

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

I suspect that people are too fearful of expressing their opinion about the issues because they know that some lunatic is loading up his weapon and getting ready to liberate America from the blight of intelligence.

[readherring.livejournal.com]

Talking about media pundits and political movements is within the realms of talking about politics. I have no problem with it. If that's all "they" talk about, it's a little silly, though. But I haven't seen that happen here.

Who are the "they" you are referring to? Feel free to name names - we're all friends here.