Re: Re: Re: Inorganic Intellectuals and the Mythical Ideal of the
On Jan 15, 2007, at 4:25 PM, Jim Straub wrote:
The problem is not that there is a lack of ideas about how to
improve the world; the problem is that the good guys do not have
sufficient power or support to bring these things into being, to
win battles over them. Leftos being a country apart from their
orddinary neighbors is not a problem because it keeps us from the
secret and brilliant ideas of the sentimentalized masses, but
rather is a problem because none of our goals can be acheived
without the support and massed power of millions of people in
concrete ways.
Yup. But Yoshie’s latest line seems to be that it’s our fault, the
left intellectuals, for sharpening our heads to too fine a point. And
her solution seems to be what the Trots call “tailism” - follow
whoever’s successful, e.g., the religious, either here or in Iran. I
think I’d rather lose.
I’m as populist or whatever as they come, but I find the
sentimentalization of the people and bottom up etc highly annoying.
What’s it mean to be a populist then? Isn’t the essence of populism
all about the wisdom of the people and the corruption of their leaders?
I used to live on 4th St in Columbus, btw. Definitely proto- american in the sense that wendy’s (fast food) originated there,
but in terms of political economy of the city, it is structurally a
sun-belt city located in the rust belt, has disproportionately
white-collar population owing to predominance of insurance and
university as town’s main industries, and is an overwhelmingly dem
city— while the general US public voters are more split between
the two parties.
Hmm, I got this from marketing wisdom, which sees Columbus as a
perfect site for test marketing.
Doug