Heim addresses:
"...Harold Twyman, senior senator from California and majority leader of United States representatives in the Parliament of the World Federation..." (p. 17)
He says:
"'I'm not talking the nonsense about "attacking impregnable Alerion" which your tame commentators keep putting in the mouths of us "extremists"...'" (p. 24)
Rings true. A minority view labelled "extremist" and words put unto its mouth. Please read about:
"'The Aleriona crisis...'" (p. 20)
- in this chapter. I don't want to summarize it tonight. In fact, I had better watch some news about our current crises.
The chapter ends on very familiar Andersonian territory. After speaking by phone to the senator, Heim has put his feet on his desk and tilted a bottle to his lips but then he chokes, splutters, thumps his feet to the floor and thinks:
"Why not?" (p. 25)
Heim has had an Andersonian Moment of Realization - I have started to capitalize it - and we know that we will have to wait to be told What This Is All About. Chapter III some time tomorrow.
11 comments:
Kaor, Paul!
That's all too common in the US, where a mostly leftist dominated media keeps twisting and distorting what the conservative opposition actually says. Anderson was writing from experience and observation.
Ad astra! Sean
" A minority view labelled "extremist" and words put unto its mouth. "
Or a view that its opponents want people to *think* is minority.
Sean,
Are the US media really leftist dominated?
Being on the left, I am used to seeing views that I agree with distorted.
Paul.
Kaor, Jim and Paul!
Jim: Yes, that too can and does happen.
Paul: Yes, most of the "legacy" media outlets, print and TV, are leftist controlled in the US.
I have next to zero experience of the UK's media, so I cannot comment on what it's like.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
We really cannot use terms like "leftist" without being more specific. I suspect (I cannot do more than that) that the slightest questioning or criticism of the most conservative of policies is labelled as "leftist."
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
I disagree. I was specific, because I cited what I have seen in the US. For my entire lifetime I have seen only hostility or disdain from leftist media outlets in the US for conservatives.
Fortunately, leftists no longer completely dominate the US media.
Ad astra! Seab
Sean,
I disagree. You are still just using that contentious word, "leftist," as if it had a single, clear, agreed and unambiguous meaning! It is a loaded term and you should indicate what kind of views are being expressed and why you give them this label. I am simply having to repeat my question.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
In the US "leftist" has the general meaning of people who agree with these basic ideas: belief in concentrating steadily more power in the State, impatience with restraints placed on the powers of the State, belief in varying degrees in socialism, that the gov't knows best how to run an economy. US leftists are also noted, in varying degrees, for their hostility to Christianity and support for abominations like abortion. And for recent absurdities like the so called "transgender" insanity. I could go on and on!
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
OK. Thank you. That is an answer.
Paul.
I rather dislike the whole 'left' 'right' political terminology. I agree with those who suggest having several political axes to map broad scale political views.
To the extent that left-right makes sense as one axis of a mapping, 'left' would be egalitarian and 'right' would be approving of social inequality. The term started early in the French Revolution with the supporters of monarchic/aristocratic rule sitting on the right of the King in the Estates General. In that sense I lean left, but I can see egalitarianism being pushed to harmful degrees.
The 'left' 'right' mapping is one case of lumping beliefs that don't follow one another together, a "forced teaming".
Eg: for decades being against nuclear power was considered part of being 'left wing', while deciding how much of the energy humans need should come from fission reactors is (almost) totally unrelated to how egalitarian a society would be. I say 'almost' because having lots of energy available makes it easier to have energy available to even the least prosperous, so pro-nuclear *should* be a 'left' policy.
Another case of 'forced teaming' I have seen complained about is attaching T to LGB. Apparently some transwomen (ie: men who claim to be women) complain about lesbians rejecting them as sexual partners. So this is a case of the T forcing themselves on L to the detriment of L. See also the issue of putting 'transwomen' in women's prisons, domestic abuse shelters...
Kaor, Jim!
While I agree the left/right "mapping" has its weaknesses, I think it's basically sound. Yes it goes back to the French Revolution and to accidents like the seating arrangements of the warring factions in the National Assembly/Convention.
Those who yell loudest for "egalitarianism" also don't seem to mind making autocratic use of the coercive powers of the State, so I dismiss that.
I have nothing but contempt for the "transgender" nonsense. So I'm not surprised to find out lesbians reject fake women, men many of whom did not even have their generative organs removed.
Ad astra! Sean
Post a Comment