![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Then behind me sink again
Nov. 6th, 2010 02:06 pm
Currently at Toronto Pearson: 4.
Months ago, I had been meaning to say something about Jon Stewart's "stop hurting America" appearance on Crossfire. I don't know if I ever will or not, but I had to say something about this bit of Stewart's speech at his big to-do in DC last weekend, which was quoted in the local lefty hooker-ad paper: "Most Americans don't live their lives solely as Democrats, Republicans, Liberals, or Conservatives. Americans live their lives more as people that are just a little bit late for something they have to do." I read that and I thought: but that's just the problem! And it's getting worse and worse! And Stewart's next sentence was: "Often something they do not want to do, but they do it." Yup. Yup. That's just the damn thing. That's why everybody hates everybody else more and more--and he's right that the political-theoretical differences are not really deep; they're epiphenomenal more than not; Carl Schmitt is more and more right: first you want to fight, and then you find something to fight about--and no it's not "I'll go and then you go", it's "gas-brake-honk, honk-honk-punch." We don't punch each other out in the traffic jam, but we do elect assholes and scorn political pansies.
Speaking of electing assholes, Paul Krugman's brief commentary on how Harry Reid managed to get reelected touches on something I had been thinking about George Smitherman's puzzling non-campaign against Rob Ford. Rob Ford is demonstrably a stupid asshole. OK, look, I do believe he tries to do the right thing as he sees it. Basically I think that Rob Ford is one of those really awful people who are constitutionally horrible but were brought up well--he's one of hoi epieikes, the "seemly" (eikos = like-ly; eikon = like-ness) and "decent". But as politicians go (which is to say, not necessarily as people in general go), he is demonstrably a stupid asshole (although I do feel more and more like the political hacks are finding their way into elected office, and politics is coming to resemble its image). Smitherman, as far as I could see, never hammered that point home. He did position himself, or become positioned by default, as the anybody-but-Ford candidate. But he never made the case why not Ford. Since he never explicitly made an issue of Ford's personality, including his political personality, the apparent difference between them could only be one of policy--and Smitherman fell all over himself to move as close to Ford in terms of policy as a sane person could. The only difference you could make out between Smitherman and Ford in terms of policy was that Ford was offering everyone an additional free pony and public floggings of all the people they hate.
I keep wondering lately whether Pierre Trudeau would be electable today. Ignatieff was supposed to be his second coming, and Ignatieff has turned out to be almost as unelectable as Dion was. Is being "an intellectual" a fatal character flaw now? Well, Obama was elected.... The most obvious difference between Trudeau and Ignatieff is that Trudeau was comfortable with his arrogance, and it was a political asset for him. Ignatieff just keeps struggling to pass as an asshole who was brought up right.
I had been saying during the mayoral campaign that people like Ford because he's an asshole, not in spite of it. I still believe that. But at the same time I hold out the hope that people, though they like assholes, know deep down that they shouldn't like assholes--that it's easier to vote for an asshole, and enjoy it, when you're not made to confront the fact that that's what you're doing.
The problem, of course, is how to say "my honourable opponent is a stupid asshole" without being an asshole yourself.
Months ago, I had been meaning to say something about Jon Stewart's "stop hurting America" appearance on Crossfire. I don't know if I ever will or not, but I had to say something about this bit of Stewart's speech at his big to-do in DC last weekend, which was quoted in the local lefty hooker-ad paper: "Most Americans don't live their lives solely as Democrats, Republicans, Liberals, or Conservatives. Americans live their lives more as people that are just a little bit late for something they have to do." I read that and I thought: but that's just the problem! And it's getting worse and worse! And Stewart's next sentence was: "Often something they do not want to do, but they do it." Yup. Yup. That's just the damn thing. That's why everybody hates everybody else more and more--and he's right that the political-theoretical differences are not really deep; they're epiphenomenal more than not; Carl Schmitt is more and more right: first you want to fight, and then you find something to fight about--and no it's not "I'll go and then you go", it's "gas-brake-honk, honk-honk-punch." We don't punch each other out in the traffic jam, but we do elect assholes and scorn political pansies.
Speaking of electing assholes, Paul Krugman's brief commentary on how Harry Reid managed to get reelected touches on something I had been thinking about George Smitherman's puzzling non-campaign against Rob Ford. Rob Ford is demonstrably a stupid asshole. OK, look, I do believe he tries to do the right thing as he sees it. Basically I think that Rob Ford is one of those really awful people who are constitutionally horrible but were brought up well--he's one of hoi epieikes, the "seemly" (eikos = like-ly; eikon = like-ness) and "decent". But as politicians go (which is to say, not necessarily as people in general go), he is demonstrably a stupid asshole (although I do feel more and more like the political hacks are finding their way into elected office, and politics is coming to resemble its image). Smitherman, as far as I could see, never hammered that point home. He did position himself, or become positioned by default, as the anybody-but-Ford candidate. But he never made the case why not Ford. Since he never explicitly made an issue of Ford's personality, including his political personality, the apparent difference between them could only be one of policy--and Smitherman fell all over himself to move as close to Ford in terms of policy as a sane person could. The only difference you could make out between Smitherman and Ford in terms of policy was that Ford was offering everyone an additional free pony and public floggings of all the people they hate.
I keep wondering lately whether Pierre Trudeau would be electable today. Ignatieff was supposed to be his second coming, and Ignatieff has turned out to be almost as unelectable as Dion was. Is being "an intellectual" a fatal character flaw now? Well, Obama was elected.... The most obvious difference between Trudeau and Ignatieff is that Trudeau was comfortable with his arrogance, and it was a political asset for him. Ignatieff just keeps struggling to pass as an asshole who was brought up right.
I had been saying during the mayoral campaign that people like Ford because he's an asshole, not in spite of it. I still believe that. But at the same time I hold out the hope that people, though they like assholes, know deep down that they shouldn't like assholes--that it's easier to vote for an asshole, and enjoy it, when you're not made to confront the fact that that's what you're doing.
The problem, of course, is how to say "my honourable opponent is a stupid asshole" without being an asshole yourself.
