Political and social writing is nowadays almost completely tribal. Maybe it always has been. Regardless, I am increasingly uninterested in making general “I’m not a fan of X … but” statements any longer.
My new kick (in some ways merely a continuation of policies I tried to enforce when I was a magazine editor) is to write as if no one cares what my political and moral commitments are. I’ll deal with issues and facts and arguments that I think interesting, and let the rest go.
I do not need to signal my virtue in every prefatory remark.
What this means is that when writing about Vilfredo Pareto I won’t often mention his relationship with fascism, or when writing about Karl Polanyi, communism. I’m against both fascism and communism, but I hardly think I need clarify my obvious antagonisms ad nauseam. I attack them separately enough as it is. Pareto and Polanyi are interesting enough on separate grounds, as are any a number of other Ps: Peirce, Perry, Popper, Parsons, and (Michael) Polanyi.
Most current social media sharing seems like the moral preening of children. Well, youths. Or, more precisely: cultists. We can do better by not appearing so concerned without our appearances, just dealing with the ideas and issues themselves. One should be able to write about a political matter without always signaling your allegiances. Among strangers, I actually do not care about their allegiances, whether they are "on the right" or "on the left" or what-have-you. I care about facts, values, principles, etc., but we should be able to discuss such matters without taking sides each sentence.
We are not required to be tribal, or to join a cult.
8
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
9 comments
Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.Sir, you are a wise man.
I'd amplify a point woven into your comment but could be more explicit: It is important to know the ideology of the creator of an idea to the extent it forms the idea, perhaps differently than a strictly "objective" approach might.
Mitch07102
Level 8
Aug 14, 2018
0
You make a very valid argument! Maybe we are off in the weeds, because we feel helpless with our own ideas as we try to make sense of what seems so upside down and unrecognizable? We need props because our singular helpless thinking is not making a difference...and we are acclimated to get instand results (push a button and get a result). Not make a plan and keep on working with it, until it does become worthless and then examine where it might be improved and make some adjustments! When people are hurting they are less likely to think creatively and about anything...’in the long term!’ They are too preoccupied with holding on, until the ‘wind changes direction!’ We need to relieve our constant companion of anxiety! And, if we are not seeing results, we look to others or blame them, because...’why are they not doing anything?’ This is a confusing time for the ‘enlightened and the un-enlightened!’ A leader would help, as we really are on our own at the moment! I myself...cannot hold in my mind one person, in the ‘mainstream,’ whose words have a ring of truth and hope in them! (Except maybe Colbert, who is relieving stress, thru laughter), There are words thrown out there...by one individual or another and they keep me from running completely off the rails, but it is not enough! Even as a strong independent person, I can see clearly how important a mentally and morally healthy leader is! I wish I had the answer...
Freedompath
Level 9
Aug 13, 2018
0
We live in a time of critique. Tribal allegiances seem to me to be cultural defined by time and place. Marx"s communist dream failed in the 20th century (China has an extremely efficient capitalistic system).
We can no longer quote the 'scripture " of the left or the right, unchallenged. Critique requires cogent construction & deconstruction of all arguments. Our conclusions must follow from defensible premises.
Speed is everything and it is accelerating. People like Nick Land believe that cultural acceleration will lead us past capitalism and others such as Frederic Jameson think we are in the final stage of capitalism.
cava
Level 7
Aug 13, 2018
1
I agree with you and might be learning something here. Sometimes I get it right. Not so long ago I talked to a business owner and Trump supporter and gave him several things to think on. I actually believe he thought I was also a supporter. Having this happen is rare.
DenoPenno
Level 9
Aug 13, 2018
1
I find myself repulsed by the same sort of attitude among tv/film critics and commentators. It seems they feel every film or television show should, in some way, offer some form of social or political commentary. Maybe, sometimes, a movie is just a movie? Not necessarily a vehicle for the dissemination of values?
neoncosmoum
Level 4
Aug 13, 2018
2
A very cogent description of our apparently common dilemma.
Individuality is not understood or respected anymore. The tribal, polar nature of society today cedes no space to it. When one agrees on an issue on the side of the tribe supporting it love and acceptance are plentiful. To agree with their 'opposing' tribe on another issue is treated as betrayal of doctrines never accepted in the first place.
Agree with them and they love you as one of 'their own'. Disagree on another topic and you become despised and vilified as traitor; as a devil. It works the same way on the Left or Right. Actually I see them more as herds.
Silver1wun
Level 7
Aug 13, 2018
4
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
Share this post
Related Groups More
Memes R Us
3036 members
Categories
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.