Dean's World

Here's a conversation I had last night with Bill Ardolino, lightly edited:

[20:26] INDCBill: hey let me run a concept I'm obsessed with by you
[20:26] INDCBill: and you tell me if its retardedly inasane or interesting
[20:26] INDCBill: I'm obsessed with this idea about "systems"
[20:27] EsmayDean: HOW RETARDED!!!!
[20:27] INDCBill: how systems are not set constructs, but adaptive organisms
[20:27] INDCBill: and that this is a universal throughout all expressions of life
[20:27] INDCBill: so one might apply this idea to a variety of constructs
[20:27] EsmayDean: Yeah, I'll buy that. In many cases if not quite all.
[20:27] INDCBill: for example
[20:28] INDCBill: like biology - like how making incremental yet concrete changes in a human body rely on challenging it in varied rythyms, rather than a simple equation of MORE FASTER MORE
[20:28] INDCBill: and in politics
[20:28] INDCBill: how advancing a political platform relies on moving s position forward in increments that challenge reactionary forces to adapt and adopt, rather than ramming a position home
[20:28] INDCBill: which would produce contrary results
[20:28] INDCBill: and in the case of culture
[20:28] INDCBill: I'd compare the calvanist protestant American ideology that seeks permanence as an ideal with eastern philosophy that believes in constant fluid change
[20:29] INDCBill: and how a combination of the two to achieve legitimate progress (by capitializing on acievable permanent goals by utilizing change) may be the most constructive methodology
[20:29] INDCBill: so is that insane?
[20:29] INDCBill: I have these thoughts on the john
[20:30] EsmayDean: LOL
[20:30] INDCBill: I see this thread throughout life. I'm convinced I've found the meaning of it all
[20:30] INDCBill: and I want to start a cult
[20:30] INDCBill: will you join me Dean?
[20:30] INDCBill: will you?
[20:31] EsmayDean: Will there be peanut butter?
[20:31] INDCBill: uh
[20:31] INDCBill: er
[20:31] INDCBill: sure
[20:31] EsmayDean: I'm in!
[20:31] EsmayDean: Seriously.
[20:31] EsmayDean: I'm not sure what the "systems" concept has to do with the rest of it all, unless you're seeing the body politic itself as an organic system. Which it arguably is.
[20:31] INDCBill: yes
[20:31] INDCBill: that's one component
[20:32] INDCBill: culture is another
[20:32] INDCBill: biology is another
[20:32] INDCBill: just a common thread I take note of
[20:32] EsmayDean: This is why usually--usually--getting involved in the nitty gritty of whatever people are pissing and moaning about at the moment is usually--usually--a waste of time.
[20:32] INDCBill: yeah, but is it?
[20:32] INDCBill: tactically it may be
[20:33] EsmayDean: It depends.
[20:33] INDCBill: but as a part of the whole, it may serve a purpose
[20:33] EsmayDean: Let me put it to you this way:
[20:33] EsmayDean: The Harriet Miers nomination is either a watershed moment that will fundamentally alter the Republican party and hence American politics for decades.
[20:33] EsmayDean: Or it isn't.
[20:33] INDCBill: heh
[20:33] EsmayDean: Odds are usually on "isn't."
[20:34] INDCBill: let me give you an example I thought of, a bit less grandiose, yet practical
[20:34] INDCBill: that "crescent of embrace" brouhaha
[20:34] INDCBill: while I thought it was a nice design, and found the right wing reaction overblown and in [a few] cases, racist
[20:35] INDCBill: i also thought that the best course of action was for the architect to change any direct allusions to islam ("cresecent" etc)
[20:35] INDCBill: just in case the symbolism was legitimately inappropriate
[20:35] INDCBill: but this "reasonable" opinion that I had
[20:35] INDCBill: this nuance, was lost in the furor
[20:36] INDCBill: which was arguably more repellent and ridiculous to me than the original offense they were complaining about
[20:36] INDCBill: but after it was all over
[20:36] INDCBill: and it achived results (the brouhaha)
[20:37] INDCBill: which basically achieved the practical effect of changing the memorial just enough to avoid uncomfortable allusions
[20:37] INDCBill: I realized that maybe they challenged just enough to be efficacious
[20:37] INDCBill: bending the scenario without breaking
[20:37] INDCBill: (breaking meaning turning people off so much with their outsized reaction that it was politically ineffective)
[20:38] INDCBill: thus the change in the political "system" was managed successfully
[20:38] EsmayDean: Yeah. What you seem to be alluding to is the fact that hyperbolic rhetoric is often effective, even if it turns a lot of us off.
[20:38] INDCBill: yeah - the question is - to what degree?
[20:38] INDCBill: where is the cut off? and in what cases do emotionalism and rhetoric trump reason as a practical method
[20:38] INDCBill: and vice versa
[20:38] EsmayDean: It's the "act shrill enough and you'll get what you want." The thing is, if you're going to do that, you'd better realize that you do run a risk.
[20:39] INDCBill: exactly
[20:39] EsmayDean: Any time you go that route, you turn some people off.
[20:39] EsmayDean: It's a calculation: if you turn off more people than you rally, you lose.
[20:39] INDCBill: that's why politics is such an exquisitely difficult game
[20:39] INDCBill: and why it turns off intellectuals
[20:39] INDCBill: and f*cking sane, honest people
[20:39] EsmayDean: Yeah.
[20:39] EsmayDean: The Kosites will keep losing until they understand that.
[20:40] EsmayDean: Although we should admit to some elitism on our part. The people slugging it out WWF style, the Coulters and the Limbaughs and the Frankens and such... maybe they're just playing the game by the rules they know will win.
[20:40] INDCBill: depressingly true
[20:41] INDCBill: another example would be abortion. what is the proper way for pro-lifers to achieve ends in the face of such majority position against theirs? I think it's incremental
[20:41] INDCBill: and whole hog is counterproductive
[20:41] INDCBill: but good luck finding a prolifer that agrees with that
[20:41] EsmayDean: The difference being the right these days usually HAS a coherent philosphy.
[20:41] INDCBill: thats true
[20:41] INDCBill: the left is f'ing scattered
[20:42] EsmayDean: My son Drake is trying to type.
[20:42] EsmayDean: fsav
[20:42] INDCBill: heh
[20:42] INDCBill: what is he 4 months?
[20:42] EsmayDean: He's 9 months, so a bit incoherent.
[20:42] INDCBill: heh
[20:43] INDCBill: everybody's posting pics of their kids lately
[20:43] INDCBill: you better join in
[20:43] EsmayDean: Rose posts 'em and I link periodically.
[20:43] EsmayDean: But you're right about the prolifers. The unyielding unbending ones seem not to realize they will never get their way.
[20:43] INDCBill: they talk past their practically intended audience
[20:44] EsmayDean: Some of them do good work, running shelters and medical programs and such.
[20:44] EsmayDean: Honestly I think the worst thing that could happen to the pro-life movement is to have Roe v. Wade overturned.
[20:44] INDCBill: hmmm
[20:44] INDCBill: maybe
[20:44] INDCBill: be a hell of a fight
[20:44] INDCBill: in various localities
[20:44] EsmayDean: Yeah but then they'd be face to face with the fact that the vast majority of people in America, men and women, are perfectly comfortable with restrictions on abortion but will not support an absolute ban.
[20:45] INDCBill: yeah
[20:45] EsmayDean: It's why, in my view, Roe must go. I'm pro-choice, but it's been distorting our politics for 30 years. There's no other country in the West where this is a big issue, and the reason is the democratic process finds compromises that most people can live with.
[20:46] INDCBill: well you may soon get your wish
[20:46] EsmayDean: I hope so.
[20:46] INDCBill: within 2 years, I'd say
[20:46] EsmayDean: Mind you, it'll mean the Republican coalition collapses within 5 years.
[20:46] INDCBill: possibly
[20:46] EsmayDean: Millions of pro-life voters will be able to vote Democrat again.
[20:47] INDCBill: do you think its possible to have a third way?
[20:47] EsmayDean: Third way on abortion? Or you mean in general?
[20:47] INDCBill: poltically
[20:47] INDCBill: a third part
[20:47] INDCBill: "classical liberal"
[20:48] EsmayDean: Oh. Yeah. Sure.
[20:48] EsmayDean: In retrospect, Clinton was much better at this than I realized at the time.
[20:48] EsmayDean: Bush would have been the same but the war's been a distraction.
[20:48] INDCBill: triangulation, yeah
[20:48] EsmayDean: There's another way of putting that.
[20:48] EsmayDean: What is it I'm trying to remember... oh yeah:
[20:48] INDCBill: compromise
[20:49] EsmayDean: 1) Thesis, 2) antithesis, 3) synthesis.
[20:49] EsmayDean: Bush's entire effort to bring private accounts to Social Security is pure Third Wave stuff. But he's got a Democratic bloc so against it and willing to fight so hard against it it won't happen.
[20:49] EsmayDean: It's probably going to take a Democrat to get that done.
[20:50] INDCBill: yeah
[20:50] EsmayDean: Just like it's going to be a Democrat who finally does away with race-based affirmative action.
[20:50] INDCBill: faster, please
[20:50] EsmayDean: Too bad I feel scared sh*tless to let these people in charge of national security.
[20:51] INDCBill: yep
[20:51] EsmayDean: A Democratic Party headed by Howard Dean is one I can't possibly support.
[20:51] INDCBill: too many howard deans in the fringes of the party
[20:51] INDCBill: ha!
[20:51] INDCBill: oops
[20:51] INDCBill: did I say "fringes?"
[20:52] EsmayDean: I should publish this conversation. :-)
[20:52] INDCBill: not a bad one
[20:52] INDCBill: you could start a series
[20:52] EsmayDean: Yep.
[20:52] INDCBill: "Random IM Conversations with Ardolino"
[20:54] INDCBill: well, I'm off to watch Hitchikers Guide to the Galaxy. Hopefully it doesnt destroy the book
[20:54] EsmayDean: Keep expectations low.
[20:54] INDCBill: heh
[20:54] INDCBill: later