I get email from them. They want to leverage the power of the internet into a tool for revolutionary irredentism; for change; for progressive Rooseveltian change; perhaps change we can believe in, even if that's looking shopworn and cynical. After a while, they wonder why the power of the internet hasn't led to the desired revolution. Then they blame elitists, perfectionists, purists and some dude named Ralph.
Their reasoning is masterful. They are revolutionary philosophers and they are using the internet. They have thought deeply and concluded that this is the best possible use of their time. Therefore it's best possible use of my time. Get active, they tell me. Do something. Do something progressive. So I do, but I suspect mocking their entreaties is not what they have in mind.
I have labored to express a home truth to them. My direct approach hasn't worked. It makes no sense to them. I've tried, but we're not operating on the same wavelength. My most recent response takes the form of a ludicrous, disingenuously enthusiastic syllogism.
This doesn't work either, but it has the virtue of being philosophically irrefutable. It also makes them angrier, but that can't be helped. Progress and its cheerleaders will have to learn to cope.
Comments (10)
Who needs to do something, when we have Carl Davidson to continue the rebellion? Just follow.
Posted by Michael Dawson | January 7, 2011 3:56 PM
Posted on January 7, 2011 15:56
That's cyber-radicalism I can believe in.
Posted by Al Schumann | January 7, 2011 4:31 PM
Posted on January 7, 2011 16:31
Fucking words.
Posted by Jack Crow | January 7, 2011 4:43 PM
Posted on January 7, 2011 16:43
May I play?
Something needs to be done.
This is being done.
Therefore this is something.
Or,
It needing to be done is a state that is never satisfied by this (i.e., your something) b/c even if it is something, it will always be needing to be done. Doing it accomplishes nothing; its existential (modal) state being one of continual need, i.e., never being done.
Or,
Something needs to be done.
This is being done.
Therefore it needs something.
Posted by Jim H. | January 7, 2011 4:54 PM
Posted on January 7, 2011 16:54
Yes, painfully. Corporate operant conditioning gradually eradicates all meaning from communication. It tropes to tactical status games and advocacy posturing from people who try to make a living selling a postured existence. They take rejection as a threat to their livelihood.
Posted by Al Schumann | January 7, 2011 4:56 PM
Posted on January 7, 2011 16:56
Lovely syllogisms, Jim. The last is one I could live by.
Posted by Al Schumann | January 7, 2011 4:58 PM
Posted on January 7, 2011 16:58
Al, nice catch.
Posted by Jack Crow | January 7, 2011 6:25 PM
Posted on January 7, 2011 18:25
Thanks, Jack. Exposure to said operant conditioning has left me a with a tendency to edge away. My nose itches and my feet start tingle. If I were a squid, I'd jet some ink. Instead, I have syllogisms that serve more or less the same social purpose.
Posted by Al Schumann | January 7, 2011 6:53 PM
Posted on January 7, 2011 18:53
ya thanx jack..for everything
and oh ya ...thanx ralph
Posted by op | January 8, 2011 8:12 AM
Posted on January 8, 2011 08:12
[laughs, chokes on third cup of coffee]
RALPH SHOT MY DAWWWG!!
Posted by ms_xeno | January 9, 2011 5:18 PM
Posted on January 9, 2011 17:18