On Jan 15, 2007, at 4:25 PM, Jim Straub wrote:
> The problem is not that there is a lack of ideas about how to
> improve the world; the problem is that the good guys do not have
> sufficient power or support to bring these things into being, to
> win battles over them. Leftos being a country apart from their
> orddinary neighbors is not a problem because it keeps us from the
> secret and brilliant ideas of the sentimentalized masses, but
> rather is a problem because none of our goals can be acheived
> without the support and massed power of millions of people in
> concrete ways.
Yup. But Yoshie's latest line seems to be that it's our fault, the left intellectuals, for sharpening our heads to too fine a point. And her solution seems to be what the Trots call "tailism" - follow whoever's successful, e.g., the religious, either here or in Iran. I think I'd rather lose.
> I'm as populist or whatever as they come, but I find the
> sentimentalization of the people and bottom up etc highly annoying.
What's it mean to be a populist then? Isn't the essence of populism all about the wisdom of the people and the corruption of their leaders?
> I used to live on 4th St in Columbus, btw. Definitely proto-
> american in the sense that wendy's (fast food) originated there,
> but in terms of political economy of the city, it is structurally a
> sun-belt city located in the rust belt, has disproportionately
> white-collar population owing to predominance of insurance and
> university as town's main industries, and is an overwhelmingly dem
> city--- while the general US public voters are more split between
> the two parties.
Hmm, I got this from marketing wisdom, which sees Columbus as a perfect site for test marketing.
Doug