Like you I am uneasy. Queasy even. But I am home sick and you are well, sitting at the office, putting off work by reading this. Yesterday, I was half-listening to On Point on NCPR and caught a bit of the discourse on what is "liberal" and whether it is actually coming back. Ben has been mulling this a bit in recent posts as he considers the converse, what is "conservative" after spending the weekend at the night rallies of CPAC.
One comment maker at the On Point web page for yesterday's show raised the word "libertine" which I think is a great one. Also, we have to consider "licentiousness". Yet are these words that most properly apply to liberals or libertarians? Is a neo-con infused culture "libertine or "licentious" given that it went from the liberation of Baghdad 2003 not being the liberation of Paris 1944 to the criminal celebrity executive class of Enron / Martha / Conrad Black to the financial collapse based on the freedom to sell investments in nothing, as trading credit default swaps in the early 2000s being no better than selling Florida swamp lands in the early 1900s.
Yet it is the conservatives who today claim that the market is being perverted by the liberal libertine licentiousness of Obama. It is not a satisfactory response. Frankly, it all reminds me of slurs against the neighbouring people. The Dutch dislike the Belgians, the Norwegians receive the slurs of the Swedes, Poles hate the Kashubians, and everyone picks on the Scots, Jews and nearest aboriginal people. And the slanderers are themselves disliked in return for the same reasons which generally boils down to the "they" being not governable. Whoever the "they" in particular is, well, "they" don't follow the rules. Rules about drink, sex, loyalty and most of all money. "They" run fast and loose. They are libertines. Yet, as the utter failure of US neo-cons has proven for us all, we don't necessarily follow or even know the rules we claim to love. Ideological puritanism fails. It's just not how humans work.
Where is all this going? Mr. Harper, of course. He seem to have abandoned all prior stances, dropped the facade that he is actually following a principle other than dealing with reality even when that reality is a bit like poking a bee hive with a stick. Could you imagine the Prime Minister now of accusing anyone of being a "liberal" or a "socialist"?? Couldn't happen. And that is good. I don't know if the man has made me like him more through his actual policies. I don't know if the plan for spending on public infrastructure is better than lowering the GST or increasing the GST rebate. But I do like that he is dealing with reality, that he has authorized himself to do whatever it may take. Ideology be damned. In a way, that takes a certain sort of license itself. It requires one to be a sort of libertine which, oddly, makes me a little bit less uneasy.
Comments
Chris Taylor - March 4, 2009 6:13 AM
Everyone picks on the Scots? The Jews, certainly. But the Scots? Hardly.
Scotsmen are lionised in popular culture and a popular font of Hollywood legend; even the grubby substance-abusing ones get a sympathetic look. That is why we have The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie, Chariots of Fire, the Highlander franchise, So I Married an Axe Murderer, Trainspotting, Rob Roy, Braveheart, Stone of Destiny, etc etc. There isn't a bad half-baked script featuring Scots that Hollywood won't fund and upchuck onto screens everywhere. Meanwhile the English play the bad guys in everything from The Lion King to the Star Wars franchise. Like my homeboys the Japanese, you guys just have a perennial victim complex; even when you're on top, you don't know it. I blame Sean Connery.
Alan - March 4, 2009 8:19 AM
I had to throw that in but to be fair to my peeps I offer Scrooge McDuck, every tartan logo-ed discount retailer as well as people always saying we have a perennial victim complex. I had a grade 11 teacher who, when he complained I wrote with small lettering, would say "what are you Scottish?" I can't compare to your homeboys due to, you know, that whole inscrutable thing. Sean Connery is dreamy.
Chris Taylor - March 4, 2009 9:55 AM
You're citing McDuck as a bad stereotype? He's my favourite Disney duck of all time; almost a personal hero. How can you dislike a guy that built a huge office-tower sized vault on space-shuttle-crawler tracks? And dives into his several-stories-high wad of money like a pool? When I was a teenager he is the sole reason I used to tune in to the otherwise unremarkable DuckTales.
Guys like Trump and Buffett are a pale shadow of the McDuck. They don't know how to live.
Alan - March 4, 2009 10:25 AM
It's like you mock my culture and praise it at the same time. This is very difficult for me.
David Janes - March 4, 2009 12:21 PM
And Scrooge McDuck knew when it was time to be heavily into cash. No CDOs for ol' Scrooge.
Alan - March 4, 2009 1:31 PM
He also knew when to buy!
Chris Taylor - March 4, 2009 4:55 PM
I get where you're coming from, I have a similarly ambivalent attitude toward Hikaru Sulu.
No (serious) mockery intended, though. I know in the comics Scrooge McDuck has a much harder edge than he ever did in DuckTales. In the show he is kind of a model patrician; he loves his nephews but is not prepared to bail them out of the consequences of their harebrained decisions—he prefers to teach them self-reliance instead. And he is scrupulously honest; he has frequently bawled out other wealthy residents of Duckberg for their deceit. At any rate, Glasgow city council thinks he's an all right expat.
If more modern day plutocrats had the attitude of the McDuck, we wouldn't be shelling out for bailouts right now.
Alan - March 4, 2009 5:50 PM
So if Obama were to co-opt the Scrooge McDuck and his principles, that might make everything better? I sure would like to hear Rush being reamed out in a duck accent.
Chris Taylor - March 4, 2009 5:57 PM
If Obama were to co-opt integrity and self-reliance? Sure. He'd be Reagan. Who wouldn't be up for that? =)
Alan - March 4, 2009 6:01 PM
But, if we truly understand Scrooge McDuck, you have to understand that he goes to Presbyterian kirk where he knows damn well that if he does not give back to the community through tithing and taxes and charity - he goes to HELLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL. After all, one only exercises integrity and self-reliance for the good of all and does so in a marketplace that is not riddled with fraud.
And the tartaned hell is a very verrrrry bad hell.
Alan - March 4, 2009 6:08 PM
Consider William Burrell for example.
Chris Taylor - March 4, 2009 6:27 PM
I figured his Presbyterianism was implied. It's okay to defend capitalism in broadcast Disney, but religion is another matter, I guess.
Good example in Berrell too. That guy practically was Scrooge McDuck. He's just missing the Money Bin and the nephews.