On our way back to the car from The Clash In Cleveland, Mark asked me, “So, what do you think of this new flirtation with fascism?” “Not much, given that I know what the word means,” I replied. “Doesn’t that imbue stateless terrorists with an awful lot of political and psychological power?” D piped in, “It’s just another fancy term for the illiterates.”
Every time the current administration releases new advertising for its policy, my brain breaks into a favorite line from Word Disassociation: Agnostic oppressive wall. Platypus parasol. In other words, it’s meaningless, and those who want terms, flags and symbols with which to strengthen their biases and opinions will latch on. It’s just another day in sound-byte land.
The very same evening, W pointed me to this article in Harper’s: The Bush Administration and Godwin’s Law
Yesterday the Associated Press ran a story headlined The new G.O.P. buzzword: Fascism. … The story quoted G.O.P. pollster Ed Goeas as saying, I think it’s an appropriate definition of the war that we’re in. I think it’s effective in that it definitively defines the enemy in a way that we can’t because they’re not in uniforms. Forgive me if I don’t get it just right, but what I think Goeas is saying is: We have no real idea what fascism is; hell, we’re too lazy even to look it up on Wikipedia. But we’ve used up the word ˜evil“ and we need new red meat. Let’s roll!
… On the Internet, there is a dictum known as Godwin’s Law of Nazi Analogies, coined in 1990 by a man named Mike Godwin. This law holds that as an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1. Anyone who has spent time on political discussion boards can see that it’s true; in any charged debate (abortion, Iraq, Israel, foreign policy), it’s only a matter of time before someone compares his opponent to Hitler … It’s commonly understood that once Godwin’s Law is invoked, a conversation is dead”and that any person who invokes Nazis almost definitely has failed to make his point.
I was going to suggest that the hubbub over (fade in Wolf Blitzer drumroll) The War In Iraq (fade out Wolf Blitzer drumroll) reminds me of a long session of Is To – Is Not, but Godwin’s Law works better, simply because it uses observations and probability … and sounds way cooler.
Alan left a typical one-sentence comment on a recent Schroeder post: “We seem to be getting more attention from national media as of late.”
a) It is the first anniversary of Katrina and the media want themselves viewed as compassionate fencesitters … I mean … moderates.
b) Moreover, we’re entering the Midterms and everyone’s cramming. The Dems are going to use the breakdown of Homeland Security during Katrina as an argument against the Republicans. Before some of you say “Hell yeah!” remember that neither party has done a thing to help this area. This isn’t a political skirmish, it’s a battle for our city’s life. So, as the spotlight creeps over onto us, the need to maintain quality of coverage is as important as the quantity of coverage, if not more. We don’t want to turn into some played-out nostalgia act. Let’s continue to concentrate on content over form, issues over egos (individual or collective), that sort of thing – you get the picture.
In wholly unrelated news, this article (from /.) shows us how easy it is to break into a Diebold voting machine. There is something to be said about two middle-aged women from Black Box Voting (I mean, seriously) who “bought $12 worth of tools and in four minutes penetrated the memory card seals, removed, replaced the memory card, and sealed it all up again without leaving a trace.”
Ya gotta give the Dems a bit more space, Dawlin’. The House rules render the minority party completely powerless. We can’t judge their response unless and until they take control of the chamber. I must admit that Nancy Pelosi is not a towering figure as a leader so who knows what will happen?
The Dems may not have legal or monetary power, but they sure have voices with which to decry this oversight. The same voices they used to initially vote all in favor of the Patriot Act and the Iraq war (except for Russ Feingold, my homie). Oh, for a third party.
Third parties always die in a first past the post system. Loud voices don’t fund levees.
Loud voices do influence policy. Are one’s principles and speech because one is in the minority party?
If more people vote for a third party that caters to their real socio-political tastes, it will probably be the first one to reach the post. Hey, the modern-day Republicans and Democrats came from somewhere and ousted an incumbent second (or first) party.