Friday, March 26, 2010

And today's babble "Unionist" award goes to..... "Stargazer"

This is the third, and the last, in a series of awards for malicious misreading, willful distortion, wanton decontextualization, utter disingenuousness, contemptuous hypocrisy and basic intellectual dishonesty while purporting to be someone of the Left. Perhaps before we get to today's recipient, I should confess that while much of this is facetious (and perhaps deserving of its own "Unionist' award), there is something much more serious at stake. For me, the Left designates not only a political economy that stands in critical relation to capitalism, not only a socially progressive vision of a more voluntaristic and cooperative world where liberty and justice are enjoyed by all, but, and perhaps, most critically, that this is all grounded in an ethical relation to one another, to knowledge and to truth.

Of course, right wing discussion groups are full of ignorance, hate, and intolerance. Of course liberal discussion groups are disingenuous, dull, and hypocritical (and they certainly don't have anyone as clever and intelligent as Unionist to do their bidding, otherwise we might be in serious trouble- imagine Kinsella with intelligence). But I expect the Left to speak ethically, humbly, openly, competently and self-reflexively.  My Left dwells in nuance and distinction and it takes from Nietzsche, in Beyond Good and Evil, that the oath of the philosopher ("all is to be doubted" ) should begin with that most fundamentally unquestioned belief in the antitheses of values. Today we might summon this as a challenge to binarism.

In a rarefied world of pure binary antagonism, of fundamentalism, there is no nuance, there is no reverence, respect for alterity, and there is no forgiveness (a hospitable openness gifted in advance). In fact, in such a pure world, the enemy of one's enemy becomes one's friend, the friend of one's enemy becomes one's enemy, and ends justify means, regardless of how insidious those means. Sadly, the Left sometimes resembles its extreme right wing counterparts exhibits the nuance and emotional maturity of a two year old (I think here of the psychoanalytic term "ambivalence") which often leads to deranged claptrap, personal attacks, abusive insults etc. And this leads to today's Unionist award recipient: Stargazer

Essentially, Stargazer portrays herself as the often deranged embodiment of "ambivalence", oscillating wildly between love and hate- usually the latter as attested to by her perpetual status as babbler which reads "is really pissed." And her part in the feeding frenzy on DiNovo was exemplary. Just as the derangement to the perceived betrayal was about to launch into full force a babbler by the name of Prophit had the gall to post:
The Ontario leg voted on what in my view is a proper expression of the position of most Ontarians. I am pleaseantly surprised that it was unanimous and that it had the backing of my own party, the NDP.
Stargazer quickly interceded with the following display of generosity:
You're an idiot. Sorry, I can't be nicer to you.
Proper expression of most Ontarians? Bull fucking shit. Proper expression of neo religious whackjobs and their lovely neighbours, the Zionists.
It's censorship, freedom of expression and a whole host of issues at stake here and you think this represents what most Ontarians want? I don't think so.
Isn't there a policy you agree to when you sign up here? Like you know, Human rights are not up for debate? Clearly Babble allows for that debate. Frankly I'd rather see all these Israel right or wrong defenders banned. How would that be for censorship.

Then when another babbler Peech bravely shares a personal story, Stargazer simply calls Peech a fine hypocrite:
Peech wrote:
My cousin  was a victim of a murder suicide (aka. "Palestinian resistance") while she was having lunch in a restaurant .  So I have a problem with anyone proclaiming that they have a right to call for the eradication of another nation state or murder it's members. Especially when it is  a double standard which was the whole point of my post which obviously anyone mired in ideology is blind to.
Why do we not see "Victims of Torture from the Fascist Islamic Republic of Iran week"? Why are you singularly obsessed with Israel whilst minimizing or ignoring atrocities of states much much worse? That is the point of the condemnation of IAW.

Stargazer wrote:
Hypocrisy at its finest.
Lastly, when it was reported that DiNovo had received threats of violence. Stargazer responded with this shining example of Leftist solidarity and compassion:
The thing is, we have no evidence she had received death threats. She never did give specifics and instead appeared to blame the death threats on anyone who disagreed with her...She has only herself to blame. Until she takes action on the so-called death threats, then I might believe they actually happened.
For Stargazer one moment you're a brother/sister in arms (she gushes often at Unionist whom she praises for not only anticipating her comments, but saying things so much more wonderfully) the next you're the enemy. Pure reactive, disproportionate, hate filled bile. Pure Ambivalence.


Ti-Guy said...

Of course, right wing discussion groups are full of ignorance, hate, and intolerance. Of course liberal discussion groups are disingenuous, dull, and hypocritical

Oh this so topical. I'm listening right now to the last edition CBC Ideas. It's about moral absolutism.

I recommend it to you.

Derrida (sous rature) said...

Actually I caught a few minutes of that program. I liked the revisiting of the story of Lot, and Abraham's courage in negotiating against moral absolutism.
You have a point, but I sense it may not be as much about moral absolutism as where I draw the line of non negotiation. That is, given your opinions of Harper's Conservatives, I suspect you may have less difficulty with my generalizing of Conservative boards than Liberal ones. If I'm wrong, then I commend your generosity.
Anyway, I was simply trying to anticipate questions about why I'm singling out Lefties when these types of intellectual dishonesty abounds everywhere. Truth is, I don't expect perfection, but I do expect better of the Left. One thing the Left simply doe not do well is disagree with itself.
A far as intellectual honesty in the Liberalsphere, you Ti-Guy are the exception that proves the rule. There's always room for another marauding nomadic Leftist. I may not have a home, but perhaps my first mistake was to think that "home" exists.

Ti-Guy said...

I suspect you may have less difficulty with my generalizing of Conservative boards than Liberal ones. If I'm wrong, then I commend your generosity.

It's not like I haven't observed and thought about it, for a very long time. Since I'm not a "joiner" by nature, I've had a very eclectic experience with people.

I don't object to generalisations about "conservatives" as much because I don't think of these people as genuine conservatives. I think of them as a proportion of disaffected people for whom modern life has no real or substantive meaning and who've been pandered to to mobilise into a political force. In that respect, they've been radicalised and radicalism and conservatism are mutually exclusive. In any case, it's not the ideas I have problems with, it's the bad faith. I can't be bothered with people who claim things they themselves don't believe. That goes for the Left as well, when it insists (or implies, I'm not sure what it does anymore, since its mostly incomprehensible) that equality of outcome is a desirable or even attainable goal.

Truth is, I don't expect perfection, but I do expect better of the Left.

Why is that? I don't expect anything from anybody but myself and from people for whom I have responsibility.

Anyway, if you're looking for meaning and purpose through engagement in party politics, you'll be sorely disappointed. If you're young, that's just normal. If you're older then that's a real problem.