Mouse rant blog vent mouse.

Tuesday, June 15, 2004

Conservatism is not rebellion

Nothing irritates me more than people who think that they are shockingly rebellious because they are conservative, and I mean it this time. A long time ago, someone (probably Rush Limbaugh) discovered that by setting up an easily offended liberal strawman and then repeatedly knocked it over, you could convince people that they were being shocking and rebellious by trying to out-reactionary their neighbor. MaxSpeak comments on this tendency in the post about the winners of the InstaPundit Blogroll Contest:

We also observe in these quarters the sophomoric desire to shock liberals. The quoted bloggers express a desire to win the vote. They think their viciousness is a badge of machismo, like suburban white boys who affect ghetto gangsta postures. We had the Beastie Boys, and now we have the beastie bloggers. They try to act dangerous, but all they really want to do is become commodities, and they don't even know it. There is no reason to fear nameless little people with keyboards. Rather, the approach is clinical, like the study of bugs.

Outside the unnecessary dissing of the Beastie Boys, who are not suburban phonies affecting ghetto gangsta postures, Max is right. As compelling as the rebellious pose of these freaky conservatives is, it is essentially empty. They are tools who have fallen for the easiest ploy in the world (shock people with empty cruelty!), working for free for an establishment that's just bolstering its own wealth and power. Woo-hoo! Rebelling for the status quo.
You can rebel without shocking, and shock without rebelling. Nonetheless, people do tend to equate the two, since shock is often the best way to bring attention to your rebellion. So, the best way to take the steam out of the co-option of the shockingly "rebellious" pose by the conservative establishment and their lackeys is to refuse to be shocked by it. Laughing at it is a good strategy, since it will keep you sane. Sure, some conservatives will try to pretend that the laughter is just shock, but if we keep laughing, it will become hard for them to pretend.
One way or another, refuse to be shocked. Calling for torture, racism, woman-hating, all sorts of disgusting things need to be met with an unplussed call for our society to grow up already. Not that we should ignore the shocking things they say; I think Media Matters, etc. is doing a great job by bringing the meanness and the lies to light. But the tone of the reaction needs to be either a calm, scientific approach, as Max said, or outright mockery.

2 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Nothing irritates me more than people who think that they are shockingly rebellious because they are conservative, and I mean it this time."

Nothing irritates me more than someone who should know better and that person in this case is Max Sawicky. Right after the quote you cited he tears into Glenn Reynolds - who we now know Max has an abnormal obsession about - and awards him first place in Max's contest for a completley innocuous statement.

Here is what Reynolds wrote and got him first place. It's pretty clear, except to Max:

"Civilized societies have found it harder, though, to beat the barbarians without killing all, or nearly all, of them. Were it really to become all-out war of the sort that Osama and his ilk want, the likely result would be genocide -- unavoidable, and provoked, perhaps, but genocide nonetheless, akin to what Rome did to Carthage, or to what Americans did to American Indians. That's what happens when two societies can't live together, and the weaker one won't stop fighting -- especially when the weaker one targets the civilians and children of the stronger. This is why I think it's important to pursue a vigorous military strategy now. Because if we don't, the military strategy we'll have to follow in five or ten years will be light-years beyond "vigorous.""

It's obvious that Reynolds, particularly for those that read his blog as Max claims to, that Reynolds is simply making an observation and giving a warning.

Max responds to this quote thusly:

"InstaPundit is a horse of a different color. His style is passive-aggressive, the way of the weasel. The attack is not direct and forthright, but delivered by innuendo, often through third parties. Criticism is more in sorrow than in anger. Plausible deniability shrouds his posts. If harm should befall the objects of his disapproval, it's really too bad but really their fault. They should have known better or somehow rejected bad leaders.

"The quote submitted in the contest typifies this logic: genocide is a misfortune, not a crime."

No one of any intelligence can read Instapundit's remarks and come away with such a stupid assessment.

Max often makes mistakes but this one is a humdinger. It's a completly off the wall, dumb assessmement and plays right into the hands of the Right again. What's worse is that Max now has his own dittoheads who praise Max for his stupidity.

6/19/2004

 
Blogger Roberto Iza Valdés said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

11/06/2005

 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home