Dwayne Monroe wrote:
>
> Doug asked:
>
> I can't speak for Joanna, but how long a political conversation could
> you have with a birther?
>
If there are bystanders, the situation changes. When I have staffed literature tables, etc, I had two different response to minutemen, birchers, miscellaneous riff-raff. If there was no audience, I told to fuck off before I sicced the campus cops on them. If there were bystanders, i.e., an audience who might be affected, I could carry on a polite conversation with any shithead indefinitely. Mostly they got bored.
Carrol
> ..........
>
> I can answer this question with precision: two hours.
>
> I know this because, as it happens, I devoted two hours of my
> eternally lost yesterday to an old friend and colleague who has become
> something of a birther.
>
> It was an interesting conversation -- a kind of slalom course through
> the real and the unreal. My friend -- let's call him Kratos -- knew
> that I wasn't an Obama enthusiast. And so, despite my awesomely sexy
> mocha-ness (which, presumably, meant instant and lasting Obama-love),
> he assumed I'd be at least partially on board with the sort of
> 'questions' he wanted answers to.
>
> Questions such as:
>
> * Is he really a citizen?
>
> * Why does Michelle hate America?
>
> * Why did he bow to a "towel head"? (Asked, because Americans "bow to
> no one"...except Asians to be polite and get with a 'when in Rome'
> social nicety. Seriously, this distinction was made: bowing to Arabs
> = bad. Bowing to Japanese, Koreans and others with the custom is cool
> and polite.)
>
> * How dare he release anyone from Gitmo? Didn't he listen to Dubya
> describe these monsters as being "the worst of the worst"? (But, as an
> aside, Dubya was stupid and a disgrace to conservatives but never mind
> that those guys are all super villains!)
>
> * Most importantly: who's pulling the strings behind the scenes?!
>
> This was a lot to tackle in one sitting. I decided to keep things
> direct and relevant by focusing on concrete issues such as the
> financial sector friendly architecture of the administration's
> recovery efforts.
>
> Nods of agreement; yes, the banks were on the ropes and should have
> been brought to heel. Harmony. Tranquility. But then, the
> supposedly dodgy birth certificate rises from its shallow, rhetorical
> grave, like a reanimated zombie.
>
> Again, I try to focus on the known knowns: the escalation (and sloppy
> escalation at that) of US banging about in the Afghan/Pakistan region.
>
> Nods of agreement; yes, the people who supported the President
> expecting a de-escalation fooled themselves. Nice. But then,
> Michelle's alleged "hatred" of this great land sits down at our table,
> hogging all the ketchup and farting with abandon.
>
> Once again, I try to bring the conversation back to life on Earth and
> away from the proceedings on Barsoom. Not enough has been done, I
> state, to encourage new sectors of economic activity in the US -- to
> shepherded a 21st century Keynesianism built on post carbon tech and
> other necessary stuff.
>
> Oh, sweet agreement! She sat in our laps and kissed us both on the
> cheek...simultaneously. Yes, Kratos agreed, we need a
> re-industrialization program but one suited for the requirements of
> the present and future (i.e., all the groovy green jobs stuff the
> President loves to chatter about).
>
> But alas, quick on the heels of that came outraged musings on
> Michelle's extravagance and "hidden agenda".
>
> This dizzying thematic combination, the embrace of the actual and the
> romance novel-esque was intriguing. As we parted company, I formed a
> quick theory: it's much more *exciting* to believe that 'secret
> knowledge' obtained via right-wing websites is true. It's much more
> exciting than the very mundane fact that the President helped his Wall
> Street backers and is a run of the mill American militarist. Among
> other wonkish facts.
>
> The birther/secret agenda/Michelle hates America/who's pulling the
> strings construct not only feeds on and into a vortex of racial
> anxiety, it's also -- and perhaps more importantly -- an example of
> enjoyment (maybe in the Lacanian sense? Not sure. Some of you
> quarrelsome philosophes can knock that about).
>
> It's as if you've become an underground freedom fighter or a Mayberry
> James Bond -- you have information about the mechanisms producing
> modernity's en-fuckedness.
>
> The other way, the lefty way of going through the charts and facts and
> pushing, pulling history of things (particularly of the national myth
> busting variety) cannot hope to compete with this massive,
> crowd-scripted reality television program.
>
> .d.
>
> "What fresh hell is this?"
>
> Hank Moody
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk