I Am The Enemy Of All That Is Purple
Dear AL,
Must be great to be you, what with the keeper-of-the-truth T-Shirt you got from God, or wherever. I lost mine a while back. Or, I think I used to own one. I'm not sure.
Let's assume that we're both reasonably intelligent people, capable of figurin' on our own.
We reach our opinions through a combination of experience, trusted facts/sources, logic, and emotional inclination. Is there a category I missed? Some kind of green misty field that warps truth?
What dismays me about most right-wing debate is the lack of specificity. You use loose words to describe nebulous concepts; you use sweeping generalizations to juxtapose an opinion you don't like with an evil that is unquestioned.
I asked if I'm "Idiotarian" or not. Nobody seems to be answering. Are you just being nice? Or, given a moment to think about it, does the term just seem a little unclear?
Where are the tripwires? What are your issue tests to qualify/disqualify?
Generalizing can be fun. I can start by picking a few groups, like terrorists, anti-abortion militants, Bush's economic advisors, and street drug dealers. A bad lot, all around.
I think I'll call them "Purples", and then I'll wax all axiomatic about how there's a big Purple love-fest going on, with plenty of winking and solidary and people-eating for all. See how it's all part of the same conspiracy?
Which is all ridiculous, of course. And so is...the I-Word. If you can't define it.
Diversity is a beautiful thing.
And to all, a good night...
on
| § 2
§ 2 Comments
[ You're too late, comments are closed ]
Here's the comment I replied
Here's the comment I replied to you with on our site:
Ross -
a) I don't know nearly enough about your politics to have an opinion on your personal status;
b) of course one can support the Palestinian people - one can even explicitly support their view that victory consists of driving the Israelis into the sea - and not be an 'I'. But when one takes the position that blowing up coffee houses isn't terrorism but rather legitimate warfare, but that retaliatory strikes targetting military leaders are violations of the Geneva Accord - that's pretty damn divorced from reality in my view. It's spinning fact into a garment to clothe your position. And if one does that, you get the 'I' label.
Of course I'm not the arbiter of a greater Truth. But I acknowledge that something approximating truth exists, outside our expression of it, and that our expressions ought to be an ever-closer approximation of it.
And more importantly, I believe that relations among people - whether at the individual, neighborhood, nation, or international level - ought to start with some willingness to acknowledge reality.
Call me a dreamer.
A.L.
Ross,
Ross,
does this make you An Enemy of the Purple?