dagblog - Comments for "Immoral Morality, Hyper Hypocrisy, and America's Denial of Domestic Terrorism"

Even though providing a safe

barefooted — Wed, 02 Dec 2015 02:42:52 +0000

In reply to I agree that Islamophobia is

Even though providing a safe haven to a few hundred thousand refugees […]

The current administration is proposing 10,000 accepted refugees through 2016. They are, in part, children and elderly people - none of whom will immediately impact the native workforce. Then there's the obvious fact that even if all 10,000 were able bodied and hired, the effect would be negligible within the population at large. That's one of the reasons that the federal government (no matter the president) works with states throughout the union when integrating refugees/asylum grantees - spread them out.

Do a few dozen families with even fewer eligible workers really impact a state's local unemployment?

If democrats voice that argument, they're simply wrong. We know better.

That's a valid point. With

Danny Cardwell — Wed, 02 Dec 2015 01:34:50 +0000

In reply to I agree that Islamophobia is

That's a valid point. With jobs being so scarce. It's natural to wonder how we would deal with an influx of labor. Thanks for taking the time to comment.

Yes, the inconsistency of the

moat — Wed, 02 Dec 2015 00:28:26 +0000

In reply to For reactionaries, Society

Yes, the inconsistency of the reactionaries is all about selective use of the "commons." But note how your example involves what is often described as an "act of God." Problems involving how we make choices for our families and ourselves get treated a different way and not just by people of a particular political leaning.

The privacy thing is not all bad. But it doesn't explain or propose options by itself. It is not self sufficient. The belief that it is sufficient is the problem.

I agree that Islamophobia is

HSG — Tue, 01 Dec 2015 23:07:00 +0000

In reply to Immoral Morality, Hyper Hypocrisy, and America's Denial of Domestic Terrorism

I agree that Islamophobia is a big part of our reluctance to harbor Syrian refugees. But I think the fraught economic circumstances in which most Americans find themselves also plays a role. So many of us are barely getting by. Even though providing a safe haven to a few hundred thousand refugees would probably result eventually in a wealthier nation as waves of immigrants in the past helped enrich American, too many of us can't think much past our next pay check and the first of the month when the rent is due. In such an environment, right-wing demagogues who appeal to our worst instincts thrive. Thanks for an important post.

For reactionaries, Society

rmrd0000 — Tue, 01 Dec 2015 21:10:04 +0000

In reply to Being able to avoid

For reactionaries, Society only exists when they have a problem. A reactionary legislator from the "heartland" can tell an urban legislator that there is not enough government money to pay for Hurricane Sandy, yet yell for aid if flooding or a tornado hits the good people of the heartland.

Being able to avoid

moat — Tue, 01 Dec 2015 20:11:05 +0000

In reply to Immoral Morality, Hyper Hypocrisy, and America's Denial of Domestic Terrorism

Being able to avoid conversation is a privilege in the sense that many people can keep a distance from problems and contradictions, maintaining a gateway community of the mind. The avoidance can also be understood as a dysfunction; the presence of an absence.

One indicator of the condition can be seen in the widespread acceptance of this statement by Margaret Thatcher (channeling Hayek):

"I think we've been through a period where too many people have been given to understand that if they have a problem, it's the government's job to cope with it. 'I have a problem, I'll get a grant.' 'I'm homeless, the government must house me.' They're casting their problem on society. And, you know, there is no such thing as society. There are individual men and women, and there are families. And no government can do anything except through people, and people must look to themselves first. It's our duty to look after ourselves and then, also to look after our neighbour. People have got the entitlements too much in mind, without the obligations. There's no such thing as entitlement, unless someone has first met an obligation."

The passage has often been discussed in terms of the limits of political solutions but it is not primarily about that topic. The radical privacy expressed here does not merely advance the concerns and obligations of an individual above those of the "commons." The statement removes the individual as an agent beyond whoever he or she is able to influence personally. If one were to multiply this limited agent many by many times and force the result to live and work in close proximity to one another, the result would be a society of non agents who share the consensus view regarding their collective inadequacy.

So the problems of domestic violence are not seen collectively as a matter of policy because the sources are individuals growing up inside of individual families. The society of non agents can recognize that many of those individuals and their families failed and since Society does not exist, who does that leave to blame?

Case solved.

Danny, I just want to say

CVille Dem — Tue, 01 Dec 2015 18:23:57 +0000

In reply to Immoral Morality, Hyper Hypocrisy, and America's Denial of Domestic Terrorism

Danny, I just want to say that I focused (to my own detriment) on that "suit" metaphor, and I missed the whole point of your excellent post. I have nothing to add to the points you brought up about the blind eye that so many maintain about the pain and misery (and carnage) around us. I think the President has done a very good job of showing his utter disgust at the NRA and its lobbyists (otherwise known as Congress), but his hands are tied. If nothing happened after Sandy Hook, I don't know what it will take. This mis-placed and hateful rhetoric against Muslims seems to me a slippery slope.

Thank you for writing this, and please accept my apology for going off on a tangent.

Thanks Ramona!

Danny Cardwell — Tue, 01 Dec 2015 16:16:00 +0000

In reply to I don't think it's that we

Thanks Ramona!

First, I don't own a thousand

Danny Cardwell — Tue, 01 Dec 2015 16:14:59 +0000

In reply to Immoral Morality, Hyper Hypocrisy, and America's Denial of Domestic Terrorism

First, I don't own a thousand dollar suit. Second, if we progressives could get people as worked up about childhood poverty, inequality in the justice system, or jobs with a living wage as I apparently have by using a questionable analogy then we would be on to something. I tried to give a brief account of Peter Singer's argument. If someone feels compelled to publish work that negates his moral and ethical theories; there's a space for those criticisms. The greater issue, for me, is the lengths we, as a nation, go to dehumanize the other. Fear is powerful, masquerading fear as machismo is dangerous. When I write anything I accept the fact that I'm opening myself up to criticism. I can take it. I thank everyone who took the time to engage this post. Have a great day!

I don't think it's that we

Ramona — Tue, 01 Dec 2015 14:56:00 +0000

In reply to Immoral Morality, Hyper Hypocrisy, and America's Denial of Domestic Terrorism

I don't think it's that we don't want to help Syrians, or anyone else in the world, it's that most of us, if we have any money left over, are more likely to give it to those in need we know personally, or to causes in our own country. The needs are endless right close to home.

I understand your frustration about our seeming lack of humanity. Besides all the incidences you cite, we're bombarded, for example, with the press's irrational celebration of Trump's head-long leap into fascism--as if we're watching a movie, with no cares once we leave the theater.

Even after all the talk about that terrible shooting at Planned Parenthood I saw the publisher of the New Hampshire paper endorsing Chris Christie talking about why he is their choice. The first words out of his mouth were about Christie being pro-life and promising to shut down Planned Parenthood clinics. Oh, and he's the best choice to take care of Isis. Taking care of all the evils, in other words.

We do need to talk about our own home-grown terrorists, with the emphasis on why we let it happen. It's more than just guns and mental illness, it's an entire culture, spurred on by a ratings-driven mainstream media, a rise in hateful old-testament religion, and the inclusion of rabidly anti-government "public servants" in local, state, and federal offices.

I wish I could say I'm surprised at the insensitivity and outright cruelty from those people trying to keep refugees out of our country, but I'm not. We have to work at eradicating hate and instituting kindness--not just giving it lip service but actually making it our policy. Sort of like it's supposed to be.

We're a mess, but you write beautifully, Danny. There's something to be said for that.