- This topic has 14 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 4 years, 3 months ago by
.
-
I get that, ZN. You are probably right about “not going there,” basically.
Apologies if I misread you . . . but in this case, ironically, the discussant is one of those “liberal Dems.” Not a righty by any means. Despises them, when it comes to politics in general.
It’s just a bridge too far, for this person, if the discussion moves to replacing current system with alternatives, and even the beginnings of a hint regarding this (in the conversation) seems to bring things to an instant boil.
“Won’t happen in a million years and it’s crazy to even talk about it! Human nature, etc. etc.!”
That’s the primary symptom of ideology at work. It identifies an immutable, universal “human nature” which, by its “nature” so to speak will allow one kind of socio-political arrangement and not others. So that the system in question is naturalized.
BTW I think that someone who is open to a Scandanavian arrangement is more that just a lib, they’re into the territory of progressive.
But not all progressives agree on everything, as we know. I tend to take things like that one cookie at a time. If someone is down with the advanced-type new FDR stuff and social democracy and things like single-payer insurance for health care, that’s a lot.
Good analysis, ZN.
To make it easier, I’ll forego my usual strictures and say it’s a male sibling. And, yes, in some ways, one could call him a “progressive.” He’s not really quite in the AOC camp, but he likes her, admires her, and I think he’s on board with some of the things she’s calling for. But on the subject of a radical change to the economic system, and/or flattening hierarchies, it’s a big fat No Way. He’s very rigid about that. Again, he seems to get angry at even the inklings of a discussion on the subject. That “human nature” stuff kicks in, and even when I hesitantly tried to remind him of all the cultures that lived communally for the vast majority of human existence (so it can’t be a matter of human nature) he kinda shuts that talk down too. Angrily.
He also mentioned that the only way we’d start fresh would be after a world-wide cataclysm. Not sure, but I think he might think I (and most socialists) want this, and I don’t. Quite the contrary. Quite the 180°, etc. I think we need to replace capitalism to avoid that world-wide cataclysm (via climate change).
The frustrating thing for me is that I’m positive he doesn’t get my views, at all, but is certain he does, and won’t let me voice more than half a sentence to clarify. I have a feeling he thinks I want everything to “go back” to ancient village life, without any “modern” innovations, and that if we got rid of capitalism and replaced it with economic democracy, that’s where we’d be.
Also, I’m not trying to get him to join me, agree with me, become a leftist. I really just want him to understand where I stand. That’s important to me. That family understand this. Based on recent conversations, however, I think that’s never going to happen, and it makes me, well, beyond sad.
Again, he’s well-educated and smart. This just seems to be a real sore spot for him, and he just won’t brook dialogue that might alter set-in-stone viewpoints.
The way they see it, I’m either totally in step with them or completely useless. I change the subject. Cooking is a good subject change topic.
Isn’t it more about a certain kind of cooking with you? Be honest, now:
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
