Fools Right & Left

51BNb+-LTuL._SX309_BO1,204,203,200_

I just read Roger Scruton’s updated FOOLS, FRAUDS, AND FIREBRANDS:  Thinkers of the New Left, instead of going to my high school reunion.  Sorry.

btw, these are not “book reviews”.  I didn’t want to do book reviews in 4th grade, I didn’t want to do book reviews in 9th grade, and I don’t want to do book reviews now.

I thought I was going to be a bank vice president and drive a Buick station wagon with plastic woodgrain on its sides.  This is what I do instead.  I live to figure out why people are happy or unhappy.  Some people shovel coal.  I don’t.  I shovel books.

Scruton says that the brightest liberal thinkers write nonsense, safely ensconced with tenure behind high university walls fortified with political correctness and in a smoke-free environment, unless you count pot.  They spill out books like beans.

The scary thing is, Scruton convinces me.  I have, and have read, the authors he crucifies.   Deleuze, Guattari, Adorno, Habermas, Sartre, Marcuse, Benjamin, Foucault, Galbraith, Lacan, Zizek.  Actually, I don’t have Galbraith, Habermas, or Zizek.  Interlibrary Loan headed them off at the pass, and saved me some money.

IMGP1762

These authors are nearly impossible to read.  Scruton takes them apart piece-by-piece and almost, almost, makes them understandable.  But all they do is urp up verbiage that defies understanding – on purpose.

The problem is, if the left is fueled by thin gruel, so is the right.  Scruton fails to convince me that conservatives have philosophy that can be turned into a political program either.

I’ve gone to the trouble to summarize all that I know about politics from all of the above authors, including Scruton and other conservative philosophers:

  1.  It doesn’t have to be as hard as they make it.
  2.  Political/social thinkers, both liberal and conservative, are dense and useless “players”.
  3.  Liberals think that things are bad and can only be improved by laws, regulations, “education”, government, politics, and tax money.  Conservatives think that things are pretty good and can get even better with God, prayer, and with less government, fewer laws, fewer regulations, and lower taxes.

The way that this plays out can be illustrated by, say, a school shooting.

Liberals call for gun laws.  Conservatives call for a moment of silence.  Liberals call conservatives Hitler and fascists on social media.  Conservatives call liberals snowflakes.

It used to be that nobody called the other side names.  As recently as 9/11, in fact.

This made compromise possible.  Liberals could get a little gun control, conservatives could get policemen at school doors, kids were marginally safer, and everybody was happy.  More or less.

Then along came Facebook, cable news, and clickbait meme sharks.  Throw in your average hysterical American moron with a smartphone and a gin ‘n’ tonic, and you get unsophisticated name calling.

So now there can be no compromises.  There can be no way forward.  You can’t negotiate a compromise with Hitler, can you?  You can’t reason with a snowflake who acts like a 4 year old, can you?

Adorno, Horkheimer, Scruton, Hayek – are all worthless.  They are worthless in our current situation, and they are stand-alone worthlessnesses.

I can now turn to lighter reading fare.  Unless the rare great woman or man comes along on one side or the other.  Or, preferably, on both sides.

IMGP1761

Advertisements

The Broken Internet

We all know the internet is screwing with the human mind and spirit.  But even the experts don’t know how to fix it.

IMGP1693
With “Frozen in Time” African violet between . . .

Lanier and Williams:  the experts.  One, like, invented reality and the other invented virtuality.  Or whatever.  Google them, if you give a shit.  The big problem with how the internet and social media are messing with us now is that the people responsible for implementing it are not . . . normal.

Even as scientists or engineers go, what these guys do is ineffable.  And even as I/we can not grasp the essence of what they do, they build the framework – the culture – in which we are all forced to live.  These are truly end times.

Lanier has semi-left Silicon Valley, although he still seems to work for Microsoft in some capacity.  Williams has left and become a philosopher.

Lanier suggests that we quit social media – and Google, as best we can – because that’s the only language – $$ lost eyeballs $$ – that Facebook and Google understand.  They’ll then be forced into a better way of making monstrous profits than monetizing our attention and our clicks ‘n’ likes.

Williams suggests that, among other things, we might want to consider a PBS/NPR version of the internet, a (government?) subsidized branch of the internet in which there would be non-profit search engines and social networks.  Maybe it would work.  Maybe it would suck.  Maybe it should be like C-SPAN?

None of his other notions, other than that we might need a total reboot of the internet (!) or of Facebook (Like!) in order to get them off the economic models that make us addled addicts, stuck with me.

Neither of these guys thrill me.  These books both strike me as too little, too early.

We still don’t know wtf the internet does to us.  We still don’t know wtf it does to young, developing minds.  Perhaps it makes certain that they don’t develop at all.  Or, more likely, that they develop the way Facebook wants them to develop.

I would kill for a Lewis Mumford or a Christopher Lasch right now.

If you’re technically-minded and socially-concerned, read these books.  Maybe.

If you’re really socially-concerned, read other books, blog, and grow African violets.

IMGP1692