Thursday, February 10, 2011
Political Mayhem Thursday: Who is more right, RRL or Lane?
For the past few years, it has been a great pleasure to have two of my favorite former students, Lane and RRL, battle it out on these pages every Thursday. They are both brilliant and witty; but that is pretty much all they have in common (other than a certain ideological purity that stands in contrast to many people).
RRL is a small government conservative with an admirable libertarian streak. He thinks there should be less government involvement in both people's lives and commerce. He is for broad cuts in both taxes and government services, thinks there should be fewer, not more, pollution controls, and wants more freedom at less cost. He also enjoys the musical stylings of Procol Harem.
Lane is a socialist. He believes that economies do not naturally gravitate towards the good, and thus favors a mix of government ownership and regulation to ensure that social goals are not ignored in the marketplace. He is unafraid of government as an agent for good, and does not see this as a threat to freedom. He favors government action to reduce income inequalities in the United States, and strong government action to boost employment and productivity. At home, he listens to Thorhammer.
Which is more appealing to you?
Comments:
<< Home
Lane, because he gave me a treasure trove of outlines (plus a nice flashdrive!) when I was a 1L. It aided me throughout law school.
Truly, he lived up to his share the wealth principles.
Truly, he lived up to his share the wealth principles.
RRL wants less pollution control because his motto is "Smoke'em if you got'em". I was listing to a John Prine song, "The Bottonless Lake", the other day and it includes the line "Smoke'em if you got'em".
So a philosophical question to RRL - do you enjoy John Prine's music?
Lane wants to barbeque on a smokey, charcoal and wood fired grill. Wait, common ground, both require less pollution control.
On a serious mode, I choose not to go there. I'm a centrist and that means I want moderation for the issues on both sides. There is always room to compromise.
So a philosophical question to RRL - do you enjoy John Prine's music?
Lane wants to barbeque on a smokey, charcoal and wood fired grill. Wait, common ground, both require less pollution control.
On a serious mode, I choose not to go there. I'm a centrist and that means I want moderation for the issues on both sides. There is always room to compromise.
I don't know who's right, but Lane has one rocking disguise. Latex AND a gas mask?
# posted by 
: 9:14 AM
: 9:14 AM
Clippy: It looks like you are trying to spread propoganda! Would you like some help?
Lane: Uh... not sure.
Clippy: Hint! Don't tell them you're a socialist!
Lane: Uh... not sure.
Clippy: Hint! Don't tell them you're a socialist!
# posted by : 9:43 AM
: 9:43 AM
Christine - I do in fact like John Prine. A lot actually. If for no other reason than he once wrote the line:
"She thinks all my jokes are corny
Convict movies make her horny"
I mean, how can you not like that?
Anon:
Lane's outfit is pretty "interesting" (and exactly what I've always figured a Marxist wears in his spare time), but I own my own train, and mountains of diamonds and cash. I mean, that is pretty baller right there.
Smoke 'em if you got 'em indeed.
"She thinks all my jokes are corny
Convict movies make her horny"
I mean, how can you not like that?
Anon:
Lane's outfit is pretty "interesting" (and exactly what I've always figured a Marxist wears in his spare time), but I own my own train, and mountains of diamonds and cash. I mean, that is pretty baller right there.
Smoke 'em if you got 'em indeed.
# posted by : 10:05 AM
: 10:05 AM
RRL because:
1) His common sense view is generally more on-point then Lane's pie-in-the-sky idealism
2) He didn't just spam the comments with 8 paragraphs of Pravda propaganda
But seriously dude, those cigs will kill you one day.
1) His common sense view is generally more on-point then Lane's pie-in-the-sky idealism
2) He didn't just spam the comments with 8 paragraphs of Pravda propaganda
But seriously dude, those cigs will kill you one day.
I think that telling RRL to NOT smoke them if he got them is bad.
Equally bad is if he doesn’t have the sense or inclination to share them if he got them.
If you want a proof of both RRL and Lane’s models applied in real life TODAY, look at no other than some of the former communist block countries, few of which have even joined the European Union.
People in that part of the world have come out of the communist model debacle with a mistrust for the government so deep it borders hostility. Civil duty and public works are obscene concepts and for some people, something to not only stay away from but sabotage every chance they got. Taxation is minimal and public works are paid mostly with whatever is leftover from the amassing IMF loans, after the proper personal “appropriations”.
Those who have them surely smoke them and if the Lamborghinis cannot be driven because of the giant potholes on the roads and highways , they’re taken to the summer house in Monaco and replaced with the Hummers.
It’s been now twenty two years of smoke them if you got them and all there is to show are ashes.
Equally bad is if he doesn’t have the sense or inclination to share them if he got them.
If you want a proof of both RRL and Lane’s models applied in real life TODAY, look at no other than some of the former communist block countries, few of which have even joined the European Union.
People in that part of the world have come out of the communist model debacle with a mistrust for the government so deep it borders hostility. Civil duty and public works are obscene concepts and for some people, something to not only stay away from but sabotage every chance they got. Taxation is minimal and public works are paid mostly with whatever is leftover from the amassing IMF loans, after the proper personal “appropriations”.
Those who have them surely smoke them and if the Lamborghinis cannot be driven because of the giant potholes on the roads and highways , they’re taken to the summer house in Monaco and replaced with the Hummers.
It’s been now twenty two years of smoke them if you got them and all there is to show are ashes.
Lane-
Be cool man. Sensitive much?
All you liberal hippie types get to be called commies and Little Stalins when you'd prefer "progressive," and all us conservatives get to be called fascists and Little Eichmanns when we'd prefer "super cool smart guys who all the popular kids want to hang out with."
Be cool man. Sensitive much?
All you liberal hippie types get to be called commies and Little Stalins when you'd prefer "progressive," and all us conservatives get to be called fascists and Little Eichmanns when we'd prefer "super cool smart guys who all the popular kids want to hang out with."
Procul HarUm!!!! Geez. I'm moving you back to the the 3 AM air shift if you don't get that straight.
What I find disturbing about modern political discourse is that there is little discussion of political theory at almost any level these days.
In the 60's people like Michael Harrington, a very liberal advocate for the poor, was on television all the time. William F. Buckley had a TV show and there was a lot of batting around of "ideas."
Today all we have is the batting around part.
What I find disturbing about modern political discourse is that there is little discussion of political theory at almost any level these days.
In the 60's people like Michael Harrington, a very liberal advocate for the poor, was on television all the time. William F. Buckley had a TV show and there was a lot of batting around of "ideas."
Today all we have is the batting around part.
You guys gonna form a drum circle or something? Hold hands?
Here is the funniest part about me and Lane's disagreements. Lane basically thinks the market isn't fair, mostly to workers who don't control the levers of capitalism even though they form the "capital" (in the most literal sense) upon which the economy is built. Thus, he wants to make the system more fair for the workers by taking power out of the markets and away from the "bosses" and dispersing it amongst the people. I have no doubt this would mean there were fewer "losers" in our economic system. It would also mean there were fewer, or no, "winners". It therefore might sacrifice innovation or great leaps forward on behalf of making things more equal.
Basically, I think, me and Lane only disagree about what the highest value is. Lane values equality (social justice), I value growth (which hopefully creates social justice as a biproduct, particularly through democracy), and Conan the Barbarian knows that what is best in life is, "To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of their women."
I don't think Lane is evil for believing these things, I just think he is wrong. And he thinks the same about me. And that is fine, and often fun and enlightening. I also think these arguments are best had in a place like this where we can speak in abstracts without those that favor the Marxist position answering for the legacy of oppression that is usually associated with their revolutions. But, I digress.
The power of The "D" compels you!
Here is the funniest part about me and Lane's disagreements. Lane basically thinks the market isn't fair, mostly to workers who don't control the levers of capitalism even though they form the "capital" (in the most literal sense) upon which the economy is built. Thus, he wants to make the system more fair for the workers by taking power out of the markets and away from the "bosses" and dispersing it amongst the people. I have no doubt this would mean there were fewer "losers" in our economic system. It would also mean there were fewer, or no, "winners". It therefore might sacrifice innovation or great leaps forward on behalf of making things more equal.
Basically, I think, me and Lane only disagree about what the highest value is. Lane values equality (social justice), I value growth (which hopefully creates social justice as a biproduct, particularly through democracy), and Conan the Barbarian knows that what is best in life is, "To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of their women."
I don't think Lane is evil for believing these things, I just think he is wrong. And he thinks the same about me. And that is fine, and often fun and enlightening. I also think these arguments are best had in a place like this where we can speak in abstracts without those that favor the Marxist position answering for the legacy of oppression that is usually associated with their revolutions. But, I digress.
The power of The "D" compels you!
# posted by : 11:24 AM
: 11:24 AM
What is a "Tenacious D."
Also, I think Marta must be the coolest Baylor grad ever. She is brilliant.
Also, I think Marta must be the coolest Baylor grad ever. She is brilliant.
# posted by : 11:58 AM
: 11:58 AM
Well, first of all I don't have to answer for the NAZIs or the Italian fascists because both of those movements were founded in socialism and leftism, and have no relationship ideologically to anything I, or any other small government conservative, believes in. The very nature of "corporatism" is the government having an intense involvment in the control of business, not business controlling government as so many lazy historians and leftists believe, such that facism is a phenomenon of the left, not the right.
And, while you're correct that much of the western world consists of democracies with things like huge welfare programs and socialized medicine, there is no socialized democracy, at least in so much as either you or Marx envinsioned one (not that I think Marx believed in democracy, or freedom for that matter). Those countries all operate fundamentally within the capitalist/market system, and their econmies are built around that system. The only difference is the tax structure and redistribution of wealth through taxation, but there is no "socialism" as an economic system in those countries.
And, while you're correct that much of the western world consists of democracies with things like huge welfare programs and socialized medicine, there is no socialized democracy, at least in so much as either you or Marx envinsioned one (not that I think Marx believed in democracy, or freedom for that matter). Those countries all operate fundamentally within the capitalist/market system, and their econmies are built around that system. The only difference is the tax structure and redistribution of wealth through taxation, but there is no "socialism" as an economic system in those countries.
# posted by : 12:29 PM
: 12:29 PM
Actually language from the NAZI party platform:
"It must be the first duty of every Citizen to carry out intellectual or physical work. Individual activity must not be harmful to the public interest and must be pursued within the framework of the community and for the general good."
"The abolition of all income obtained without labor or effort."
"In view of the tremendous sacrifices in property and blood demanded of the Nation by every war, personal gain from the war must be termed a crime against the Nation. We therefore demand the total confiscation of all war profits."
"We demand the nationalization of all enterprises (already) converted into corporations (trusts)."
"We demand profit-sharing in large enterprises."
"We demand the large-scale development of old-age pension schemes."
"We demand the creation and maintenance of a sound middle class; the immediate communalization of the large department stores, which are to be leased at low rates to small tradesmen. We demand the most careful consideration for the owners of small businesses in orders placed by national, state, or community authorities."
"We demand land reform in accordance with our national needs and a law for expropriation without compensation of land for public purposes. Abolition of ground rent and prevention of all speculation in land."
So, there is all of your rightwing ideology for you. Sure Lane, neo-NAZIs and modern day nationalist and racists have fetishized NAZIism for obvious reasons, but the modern day neo-NAZIs are not fascists, at least insofar as that term had any meaning at the turn of the century and in the 1930s and 40s. They are simply racist, nationalist thugs, who hate anyone on both the left and right that believes in multiculturalism and diversity.
The fascists of the 20s, 30s, and 40s hated communists and other socialists too, but not because they were staunchly anti-socialism, but because they believed their socialist project was right and the others were wrong. This was a fight in the socialist/leftist hen house, and conservatives (at least as I use that term and as it is used in the parlance of our times) had nothing to do with it.
"It must be the first duty of every Citizen to carry out intellectual or physical work. Individual activity must not be harmful to the public interest and must be pursued within the framework of the community and for the general good."
"The abolition of all income obtained without labor or effort."
"In view of the tremendous sacrifices in property and blood demanded of the Nation by every war, personal gain from the war must be termed a crime against the Nation. We therefore demand the total confiscation of all war profits."
"We demand the nationalization of all enterprises (already) converted into corporations (trusts)."
"We demand profit-sharing in large enterprises."
"We demand the large-scale development of old-age pension schemes."
"We demand the creation and maintenance of a sound middle class; the immediate communalization of the large department stores, which are to be leased at low rates to small tradesmen. We demand the most careful consideration for the owners of small businesses in orders placed by national, state, or community authorities."
"We demand land reform in accordance with our national needs and a law for expropriation without compensation of land for public purposes. Abolition of ground rent and prevention of all speculation in land."
So, there is all of your rightwing ideology for you. Sure Lane, neo-NAZIs and modern day nationalist and racists have fetishized NAZIism for obvious reasons, but the modern day neo-NAZIs are not fascists, at least insofar as that term had any meaning at the turn of the century and in the 1930s and 40s. They are simply racist, nationalist thugs, who hate anyone on both the left and right that believes in multiculturalism and diversity.
The fascists of the 20s, 30s, and 40s hated communists and other socialists too, but not because they were staunchly anti-socialism, but because they believed their socialist project was right and the others were wrong. This was a fight in the socialist/leftist hen house, and conservatives (at least as I use that term and as it is used in the parlance of our times) had nothing to do with it.
# posted by : 12:46 PM
: 12:46 PM
To everyone participating in the "How quickly will the discussion turn to who's to blame for Nazis, conservatives or liberals?" betting pool, we have a winner.
Will the holder of the 11:30am-12:00pm CDT ticket please kindly step forward to claim your prize!
Will the holder of the 11:30am-12:00pm CDT ticket please kindly step forward to claim your prize!
"Fascism -- a system of government and economic organization based around race or nationality."
That is your definition, and certainly not one that the fascists of the early 20th century would've identified with. Corporatism is the defining characteristic of fascism as an economic system. Racism and ultra-nationalism are more functions of what fascists used to climb to power.
"But whereas a Marxist would say that we need democratic control of the means of production of those resources ceded to the people, and not private holders, the fascist says that it should all go to the state and we should shoot anyone that disagrees. How anyone could consider those two positions bedfellows is beyond me."
How could anyone say that anybody that thinks the means of production "should all go to the state" shares anything in common with modern conservatism or even classical liberalism, the two ideologies most commonly associated with the "right" or "anti-left" position. You're right about one thing, fascism is not the same as Marxism, or democratic socialism (whatever that means), or Lenin's brand of communism, or Stalin's brand of communism. Just as Stalin's brand of communism is distinct from pure Marxism. But, they all share a common ideological bond that you identified that places them at odds with classical liberalism and modern conservatism, which is the ultimate goal of wrestling control of capital and the means of production away from private industries and abandoning capitalism as an economic system. I don't mean to imply that the Democratic party is fascist (though it may be fascistic) but it is simply undeniable that fascism was born from the same ideological goo that brought us communism and socialism and the revolutions of the early 20th century, and all of that was on the left.
Your response seems to be, "well, but they were nationalist and racist, so that makes them ideologically alligned with the right." Well, that is only true if you believe racism is a fundamental tenet or characteristic of being on the right, or that ultra-nationalism is either. I tend to think those are competing idelogical positions, that are neither right nor left (since we know that a number of "progressives" at the turn of the century including some in FDR's cabinet believed in eugenics, it isn't difficult to see that racism is not a simple right or left issue) and that some ultra-nationalists (think Britain in the 1980s) are also the biggest supporters of the welfare state and socialism.
It defies logic to believe that facism, communism, and socialism, which were all born out of the same desire the get control of the means of production away from industry and to the "people" usually by means of the state do not share the same ideological underpinnings.
However, on this, we will clearly disagree. And on a day when Osler sought to be nice to us, I'm sure we've made everybody hate us even more. So, I will now stop and go back to counting my piles of money and diamonds and working for my very large lawfirm as an associate aboard my train.
That is your definition, and certainly not one that the fascists of the early 20th century would've identified with. Corporatism is the defining characteristic of fascism as an economic system. Racism and ultra-nationalism are more functions of what fascists used to climb to power.
"But whereas a Marxist would say that we need democratic control of the means of production of those resources ceded to the people, and not private holders, the fascist says that it should all go to the state and we should shoot anyone that disagrees. How anyone could consider those two positions bedfellows is beyond me."
How could anyone say that anybody that thinks the means of production "should all go to the state" shares anything in common with modern conservatism or even classical liberalism, the two ideologies most commonly associated with the "right" or "anti-left" position. You're right about one thing, fascism is not the same as Marxism, or democratic socialism (whatever that means), or Lenin's brand of communism, or Stalin's brand of communism. Just as Stalin's brand of communism is distinct from pure Marxism. But, they all share a common ideological bond that you identified that places them at odds with classical liberalism and modern conservatism, which is the ultimate goal of wrestling control of capital and the means of production away from private industries and abandoning capitalism as an economic system. I don't mean to imply that the Democratic party is fascist (though it may be fascistic) but it is simply undeniable that fascism was born from the same ideological goo that brought us communism and socialism and the revolutions of the early 20th century, and all of that was on the left.
Your response seems to be, "well, but they were nationalist and racist, so that makes them ideologically alligned with the right." Well, that is only true if you believe racism is a fundamental tenet or characteristic of being on the right, or that ultra-nationalism is either. I tend to think those are competing idelogical positions, that are neither right nor left (since we know that a number of "progressives" at the turn of the century including some in FDR's cabinet believed in eugenics, it isn't difficult to see that racism is not a simple right or left issue) and that some ultra-nationalists (think Britain in the 1980s) are also the biggest supporters of the welfare state and socialism.
It defies logic to believe that facism, communism, and socialism, which were all born out of the same desire the get control of the means of production away from industry and to the "people" usually by means of the state do not share the same ideological underpinnings.
However, on this, we will clearly disagree. And on a day when Osler sought to be nice to us, I'm sure we've made everybody hate us even more. So, I will now stop and go back to counting my piles of money and diamonds and working for my very large lawfirm as an associate aboard my train.
# posted by : 2:11 PM
: 2:11 PM
i had no doubt, when i saw there were 28 comments, that at least 18 of them would be back and forth between lane and rrl. just another thursday...
and marta (10:48), i can attest to rrl's willingness to share 'em if he got 'em.
but i can only imagine the fury he'd unleash if somebody, we'll call him "Ig Rother," went reaching into rrl's pack o' smokes and started passing them around the room.
and marta (10:48), i can attest to rrl's willingness to share 'em if he got 'em.
but i can only imagine the fury he'd unleash if somebody, we'll call him "Ig Rother," went reaching into rrl's pack o' smokes and started passing them around the room.
# posted by : 3:46 PM
: 3:46 PM
My favorite story from the Scandinavian countries and their whacky socialist ways, was the one where a guy got a $100,000.00 ticket for going 10km over the speeding limit.
Anon 11:58, all the brilliant credit should rightfully go to Baylor.
Anon 11:58, all the brilliant credit should rightfully go to Baylor.
Robin Trower isn't in Procol Harem any more? :(
Also, this has been an awesome and educational exchange.
Also, this has been an awesome and educational exchange.
# posted by : 4:05 PM
: 4:05 PM
The previous conversations about NASCAR, roller derby, and heckling are more appealing to me.
There is, by the way, breaking news about that last subject in my latest comment - #11 - under the most recent “Minnesota Mondays” post: http://bit.ly/eR8sXH
There is, by the way, breaking news about that last subject in my latest comment - #11 - under the most recent “Minnesota Mondays” post: http://bit.ly/eR8sXH
# posted by : 4:39 PM
: 4:39 PM
RRL and Lane are both great, but where is our Nelson Rockefeller. Not all can be on the Left or Right. RHINOS forever!!!!!!
Post a Comment
<< Home
