shag carpet bomb wrote:
> To the question from To the question from To the question from
>
> To the question from the interviewer, about why, if there's a common
> sentiment on right and left about a shared target, then why aren't they
> unifying?
>
> "Because we have not succeeded in unifying people. It's our fault."
>
Here we [sic] have the core.
1. There is no "we" that has either succeeded or failed. All propositions about that imaginary "we" which has or han't done this or that are false. (Yes, "we" can be used to refer to an amorphous collection, meaning not a collective entity but something like "we on the left" or "all of us with such and such an opinon." But it can not be used to name the object of a criticism. The object of criticism must exist in some more or less unified form that can accept or reject or modify the criticism and act accordingly.)
2. The fact that X did not succeed is not necessarily a criticism of X! That depends on the _possibility_, under given circumstances, of succeeding. I maintain that NOTHING the (really non-dexistent) "left" of the past 40 years might have don would have made a significant difference in the world. "We" (lvarious unconnected people) have tried almost everything and nothing happens. It is therefore EMPTY to speak of the left not succeeding. No one succeeded in building a faster-than-light space ship either. Big deal.
Carrol