Why the Bombings Mean That We Must Support My Politics

October 17, 2001 10:47 AM

Why the Bombings Mean That We Must Support My Politics

Those people who have different political views from me ought to be ashamed of themselves for thinking of cheap partisan point-scoring at a time like this.

sorry if this is an oldie (i searched and everything) it just seemed ... relevant, somehow
posted by walrus (13 comments total)

personally, I would have lost paragraph four ...
posted by walrus at 10:54 AM on October 17, 2001

Shrewd. I am guessing that a few of the recent posts could be substituted by this article.
posted by FidelDonson at 11:01 AM on October 17, 2001

wonderful! :)
posted by jnthnjng at 11:03 AM on October 17, 2001

reads like an onion article
posted by computerface at 11:06 AM on October 17, 2001

This is what I have been saying all along!
posted by ColdChef at 11:07 AM on October 17, 2001

That is not funny, and it shows just how absolutely wrong the writer's politics are. If only he were to adopt my political beliefs, we wouldn't be in this mess. He is a traitor and un-American, and I, for one, am sick of people like him.
posted by Holden at 11:09 AM on October 17, 2001

So the point is that we should not have strong opinions on the causes of and solutions to problems like terrorism? Well, that certainly short-circuits the necessity of actually arguing against someone's view. Simply observe that he believes it strongly and you're done.
posted by mw at 11:20 AM on October 17, 2001

maybe not that we should not have strong opinions

maybe just that we should not take advantage of the situation solely for the cause of justifying them
posted by walrus at 11:30 AM on October 17, 2001

I do recall seeing this posted on metafilter just a few days after the attack, but it linked directly to the adequacy.org article, not this syndicated version.

Anyway, good article anyway.

Oh, here we go
posted by delmoi at 12:08 PM on October 17, 2001

ohdamn ... i didn't look for that one ... my bad
posted by walrus at 12:41 PM on October 17, 2001

[e-mail]
posted by walrus at 12:46 PM on October 17, 2001

So having strong opinions is OK, but applying your principles to the current crisis is not? I just don't get what is meant by "taking advantage" of a situation to "justify" one's views. The criticism seems to assume that all opinion is arbitrary or stems from blind partisanship, and that expression of it is some kind of ideological game where points are being scored. If that's how some people see ideas, fine, criticize that mindset. But if you take ideas seriously and think they apply to real life, then I don't see the problem with analyzing the situation in light of your political/philosophical framework.
posted by mw at 3:22 PM on October 17, 2001

It's a satirical article by the way. You shouldn't be taking it altogether seriously. Nevermind.

There is a cynical tendency in some of us to jump on the bandwagon when an awful event occurs and use it as an opportunity to push our own agenda. That's what I perceive this article to be against.

I see nothing wrong with having a strong opinion, nothing wrong with taking ideas seriously or thinking that they apply to real life, and nothing wrong with analyzing the situation in light of your political/philosophical framework. There's nothing wrong with expressing those opinions, either.

What I don't enjoy seeing is politicians scrambling to get their pet bill through as a knee-jerk reaction, or releasing memos saying this is a "good day to release news you want to bury" (as happened in the UK): in effect cynically using the situation to justify their views or to cover their mistakes.

I don't enjoy seeing people jumping up and down and saying that lefties or righties or any other group must admit they were talking shit all along, because these events now prove the opposite point of view to be correct.

I get depressed by people arguing by appeal to emotion, or any of the other logical fallacies: I don't enjoy seeing reason eroded by panic, or people manipulating panic to erode reason.

Is this clear enough? I don't feel that article is having a poke at people with strong opinions who express them ... it's having a poke at people who use the tragic death of others in a cynical attempt to push their own agenda.

I don't want anyone to stop thinking or reasoning: I would just prefer it if some of them were more honest about their motivations sometimes.

And that's why I posted the article.
posted by walrus at 4:59 AM on October 18, 2001