> I accept Angela's observation that there is no way
> to exist outside of ideology. That concession made,
> however, I can think of a very practical example of
> why this is such an appealing analysis: lesser evil
> politics. The Democrats are in no way the lesser evil.
> But liberal ideologists - Nathan, you here? - can make
> some pseudo-credible arguments to the contrary. The
> moment you accept that there's an element of truth to
> lesser evilism, you're lost. In fact, it's precisely
> at those moments of appeal that the power of ideology
> is at its most sinister: that's precisely the lure that
> seduces even people who should know better into the
> vortex of compromise and betrayal.
Counter-example: I accept lesser evilism wrt Roosevelt vs. Hitler. But -- thank you Mr. "Lesser Evil" Clinton -- I'm not a registered Democrat. And, had Wellstone run, I *WOULD* have re-registered -- back to lesser evilism. "To everything, turn, turn, turn..."
What could be simpler? Most things in life aren't all-or-nothing. Of course we must be vigilant about the tremendous rip-tide that can sweep you away in certain situations.
But having this kind of rigid stance only makes one LESS able to speak to the precise conditions in which the rip-tide occurs.
-- Paul Rosenberg Reason and Democracy rad at gte.net
"Let's put the information BACK into the information age!"