---
When you're criticizing liberals you're criticizing persons that've used their lives --- persons who have sacrificed their body, speech and minds to serve the people --- while you, the smartass, serve the
market.
(heard Bill O. on t. v. taking potshots at Whoopi; and Chuck Shumer, etc.)
---
Saturday, November 28, 2009
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
Right Wing View
What is the Right wing view?
More like something abstract. The left and liberal views are pretty abstract too, but the difference is that they presume to be having deep, probing discussions. Conservatives, on the other hand, remain at the level of the knee-jerk reaction. I am going to give my thinking on this. Look at my post in this blog about the original Geek word for economics (oikonomos or something like that). Proceed to reason things out, and you end up thinking about the "household," which is a word that comes up in that discussion.
OK; so, economics is about the household. That sounds an awful lot like the Right-wing rantings-on about "the individual," etc and bla bla bla.
But then we further reason that: if it means household, and if a conservative was using the concept of "economics" in that light, the issues that would arise would involve individuals vs. households, since households have individuals in them. There should be a certain kind of discussion, then. And that discussion would be: how we define household in its relation to this famed and dignified individual. The idea of "the individual" is usually there in Right-wing thought, isn't it? This seems to me to be the case. It is true that there is a discussion about "the traditional family." OK; that's true. This is what Right-wingers talk about. Well, they used to, anyway...
There is no such discussion: there is no discussion of what we mean by "family," where the family is the "individual" unit under consideration as regards economics. The question is that of where we to draw the boundary that would define what the family is. There is no discussion either of the relationship of two concepts: that of "individual" as compared to that of "family". They went as far as the phrase "nuclear family." So is it the family or the individual that they are obsessed on?
It very much seems to be the case that Right type thought is based on this notion of an individual. Also, the "nuclear family" is supposed to be the seat of the individual. And Rousseau in an easily-internet-accessed but rather obtuse explanation of "economics" seems to agree with this "family-as-basic-unit" stuff. So let's have a discussion! Who is the family? Who is the individual? Now we are set for a discussion of the relationship between "family" and "individual," perhaps in the context of a discussion about what "economics" is.
But there isn't one. (Insert descending pitch effect) It's a great set of topics: The original Greek word for "economics;" the individual; and the family --- would be a great set of topics to expound on. Apparently, the Right never thought of it?
When thinking about Right-wing thought, I have to ask --- where are the details?
I don't see any. That is why I tend to think that Right-wing thought, as it relates to voting behavior, is always a mere abstraction --- or it is always painted in extremely broad brush strokes.
More like something abstract. The left and liberal views are pretty abstract too, but the difference is that they presume to be having deep, probing discussions. Conservatives, on the other hand, remain at the level of the knee-jerk reaction. I am going to give my thinking on this. Look at my post in this blog about the original Geek word for economics (oikonomos or something like that). Proceed to reason things out, and you end up thinking about the "household," which is a word that comes up in that discussion.
OK; so, economics is about the household. That sounds an awful lot like the Right-wing rantings-on about "the individual," etc and bla bla bla.
But then we further reason that: if it means household, and if a conservative was using the concept of "economics" in that light, the issues that would arise would involve individuals vs. households, since households have individuals in them. There should be a certain kind of discussion, then. And that discussion would be: how we define household in its relation to this famed and dignified individual. The idea of "the individual" is usually there in Right-wing thought, isn't it? This seems to me to be the case. It is true that there is a discussion about "the traditional family." OK; that's true. This is what Right-wingers talk about. Well, they used to, anyway...
There is no such discussion: there is no discussion of what we mean by "family," where the family is the "individual" unit under consideration as regards economics. The question is that of where we to draw the boundary that would define what the family is. There is no discussion either of the relationship of two concepts: that of "individual" as compared to that of "family". They went as far as the phrase "nuclear family." So is it the family or the individual that they are obsessed on?
It very much seems to be the case that Right type thought is based on this notion of an individual. Also, the "nuclear family" is supposed to be the seat of the individual. And Rousseau in an easily-internet-accessed but rather obtuse explanation of "economics" seems to agree with this "family-as-basic-unit" stuff. So let's have a discussion! Who is the family? Who is the individual? Now we are set for a discussion of the relationship between "family" and "individual," perhaps in the context of a discussion about what "economics" is.
But there isn't one. (Insert descending pitch effect) It's a great set of topics: The original Greek word for "economics;" the individual; and the family --- would be a great set of topics to expound on. Apparently, the Right never thought of it?
When thinking about Right-wing thought, I have to ask --- where are the details?
I don't see any. That is why I tend to think that Right-wing thought, as it relates to voting behavior, is always a mere abstraction --- or it is always painted in extremely broad brush strokes.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)