Sandcastle...One Cosmos Discussion...Deconstruct This!

Major Mike/Dueler88

A discussion stemming from one of many great posts at One Cosmos blog, by Gagdad Bob. GB gives a great take on being Right, and being in the psychology business. Dueler and I extend his logic a bit.

Major Mike to Dueler and Atos: You HAVE to read one cosmos today (October 11, post)…this guy is my new hero…Mr. A…we have to get him blogrolled…he is the ace of the base.

Dueler to MM: good stuff. thanks for the ping. my favorite "does not compute" moment from the piece:

"And what if having impulsive anonymous unprotected sex is the whole point of the subculture? Shouldn't we be sensitive to that?"

perhaps you actually DID spend a decent amount of time outside of History classes and the NROTC building! perhaps a career change to philosopher or psychologist is in your future.

MM to Dueler: Man, I am not anywhere near this guy’s league…being a Marine AND a History major…I have to read most of his stuff more than twice…

Dueler to MM: i also wonder howzit this guy hasn't been completely ostracized by his peers, or had his license revoked. in certain contexts, it pays to remain anonymous.

on the other side of it though - is it any wonder that therapists like dr. laura or dr. phil, who are known specifically for making clear moral judgements in their advice, are so popular?

MM to Dueler: I guess the issue is…if you are pushing a morally ambiguous “analysis,” what is your patient suppose to anchor to, to find his way…the double speak and tiptoeing around individual sensitivities is not a path to finding oneself, but more a trip through the looking glass.

Dueler to MM: absolutely. the anchor is whatever each person defines it to be. in a broad sense, that's just fine, because it's what our society is based upon. but if the anchor really is a result of something that is not based in reality, that's where the damage begins. which i think was his point.

what sorta scares me is that the nature of my own education and the creative (and political) environment i surround myself in allows me to actually understand, and perhaps be able to argue, the concept of Liberty being based on illogical presumptions. call it Victimization by Deconstructivism. granted, deconstructivism was an easy target for us in my rational-based architectural theory class. but i can still, perhaps too easily, walk the walk and talk the talk of political correctness and contextual meaning. yikes.

MM to Dueler: OK…now you got me worked up…here I go…If the left is bent on deconstruction as a methodology for democratic improvement…I say prove it.

I deconstruct processes and preventive maintenance tasks all of the time…the usual weekly, monthly, quarterly, semi-annual, annual, PM pyramid scheme, usually yields an annual PM of brobdingnagian proportions…in order to fit this into something that the production departments can swallow…the essential elements are shuffled across the weekly PMs, so that the annual/semi-annual is amortized over the entire year, and hence, no large block of down time…smaller more manageable pieces…the annual/semi-annual have been…deconstructed, and…key word, reassembled, in a different form…they have not been…by the lefty definition of “deconstructed,” violently removed, rejected, reconstructed in another form, destroyed beyond recognition…in my case, the essential elements have simply been shuffled, and the goodness of the work package has been preserved.

Not so in their case. What is more liberal than the idea of one man one vote? In Spinal Tap terms…none, none more liberal…yet the left is constantly subverting this idea with cheating at the polls. They are taking the basis of all liberal thought and smashing it beyond recognition…each and every time they do it…and they don’t care…they will sell this idea out, simply to gain the power it yields.

In that regard…what is there to deconstruct in democracy? The idea of rule by the people, via the one man/one vote concept, yields an imperfect form of government, but one that, while necessarily slow to evolve, does indeed reflect the desires of the majority, while protecting the rights (through slowness and separation of power) of the minority. What is left to deconstruct? Trying to have majority AND minority “rules,” via some physcobabble idea of protecting or preserving some manufactured, sub-cultural “rights”, bestowed upon various “victims” groups is not an incremental improvement on democracy, but a sure-fire recipe for making Moses’ walk in the desert seem short. Without the “majority rules” anchor, democracy would flop around like a flounder on the floor.

Deconstruct the imperfections of democracy…what are you left with? How would you re-assemble? Mess with the capitalistic underpinnings of democracy, via redistribution of wealth, planned economies, community-centric medicine/welfare/retirement programs, and haven’t you greatly diluted, even undermined, the one man/one vote basis for our democracy. Of course.

Our democracy, and our execution of our democracy is WHOLLY imperfect…but choose a replacement…soviet communism, Marxism, Islamic oligarchy, monarchy, fascism, sino-socialism…which is better? None…none more better. We MUST guard against going overboard in protecting or granting unfounded or un-based ”rights.” Each and every time we overstep the Constitution to do so, we really do put our democracy in jeopardy. Respect people, respect their rights as a/the minority, but do not create special classes of minorities in favor of the Jello that is political correctness…it is not deconstruction…it is demolition.

There…now I can read VDH…

I guess we think that being well anchored in Democarcy is as important as being well anchored in life, and we think the Right holds the truer path to both longevity and clarity, for our goevernment, and for us as individuals.