Go Back   Bloggingheads Community > Diavlog comments
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Notices

Diavlog comments Post comments about particular diavlogs here.
(Users cannot create new threads.)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 04-18-2008, 03:05 AM
Baltimoron Baltimoron is offline
Deactivated User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Busan, South Korea (ROK)
Posts: 1,690
Send a message via Skype™ to Baltimoron
Default Re: Why cling-gate is offensive

Quote:
Think of how often and how freely "wine and cheese parties," "limousine liberals," "Birkenstocking-wearing hippies," "amoral secularists," and about 9000 others get tossed off. With, I might add at risk of stating the obvious, no one, but no one, in the MSM "examining" how this might be offensive.
Quote:
I'll add that the longer "Bittergate" gets obsessed over, the more I find it amazing that so many rich and upper middle class people apparently worry so much about the feelings of poor people in decaying small towns, but never seem to give a crap about the feelings of poor people in decaying inner cities.
Of course, I'm naive, but you hint at one of four responses I'm just not hearing (now, or about McCain). Overall, I'm sorta pleased American journalism and some laypeople have discovered epistemology. I'm pleased that laypeople and the elitist pundits can both talk about Marxism without red-baiting. It's taken long enough for leftie academics to get their research into the MSM, and now college grads can share their yawns with our families. "Listen, Mom, I read The Communist Manifesto and The German Ideology, and we covered this one week!" I'm also glad we could learn about African-American churches, but still we can't talk about Malcolm X (the "chickens" quote is still toxic after 40 years, and is covering the field from assassinations and elections) and his discussions with MLK. But, we can't talk about Muslim nationalism in the African-American community head-on. Next, I want to have a national chat about my father's messianic Judaism and gambling and African-American tribal members on Native American reservations. We have time yet, don't we?

1. rationalism: innate truths
2. empiricism: somewhere right now some Poli Sci prof is crunching numbers, and in 2010, we can invite him on bhTV (when Bob/Mickey read the APSA publications for talent). Really, though, I see no great demand for homemade polling.
3. constructivism: I have a soft spot for this, but after these incidents, I realize talking and reaching consensus is un-American (I need to do polling).
4. skepticism: leads to elitism.

By all means, though, let's just trade generalizations and admire spin!

Last edited by Baltimoron; 04-18-2008 at 08:34 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 04-18-2008, 03:12 AM
bjkeefe bjkeefe is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Not Real America, according to St. SaŽah
Posts: 21,798
Default Re: Why cling-gate is offensive

Baltimoron:

Quote:
Of course, I'm naive, but you hint at one of three responses I'm just not hearing (now, or about McCain).
Sorry. Don't understand what you're saying.
__________________
Brendan
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 04-18-2008, 03:22 AM
Baltimoron Baltimoron is offline
Deactivated User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Busan, South Korea (ROK)
Posts: 1,690
Send a message via Skype™ to Baltimoron
Default Twice Is the Charm

Quoted post edited now (twice) with the passages of yours that inspired me to rant and my faulty enumeration rectified.

Last edited by Baltimoron; 04-18-2008 at 08:36 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 04-18-2008, 04:34 AM
bjkeefe bjkeefe is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Not Real America, according to St. SaŽah
Posts: 21,798
Default Re: Why cling-gate is offensive

Baltimoron:

Sorry. I still don't understand what you're trying to say, even with the added quotes. What is the "one of three responses" that I hinted at? What are the other two?
__________________
Brendan
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 04-18-2008, 01:20 PM
Thus Spoke Elvis Thus Spoke Elvis is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 329
Default Re: Mickey lets us down!

Quote:
We generally look to Mickey as the pop culture guru of BHTV, but I'm afraid he's missed the mark this time. Does he really think there are a lot of yuppie boho professors who are going to be dissuaded from moving to Saudi Arabia because they won't be able to see a Britney Spears concert? That seems laughably unlikely to me, unless the demographic of the professoriat has been expanded to include lots of eleven-year-old girls in the decades since I graduate from university and law school.

I think Mickey's using "Britney Spears concert" as a euphemism for something else that young professors would miss if they moved to Saudi Arabia. I'm sure living in Saudi Arabia for an extended period would be an interesting cultural experience, but I'm thinking that most red-blooded Western men would probably prefer to live in a society where women wore a little less clothing and seemed a little more available.

Last edited by Thus Spoke Elvis; 04-18-2008 at 01:59 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 04-18-2008, 04:18 PM
jaoneal jaoneal is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 10
Default 3rd person vs. 1st

Bob is wrong to imply that others are necessarily in a better situation (than we ourselves are) to explain our behavior. The sorts of '1st person' cognitive biases he refers to are just as prevalent in our explanations of others as ourselves.

When someone makes a decision with bad consequences they are predisposed to view the cause of the decision as external--so Pres. Bush might see his decision to remove WMDs from Iraq in terms of the bad information that the CIA and others (such as former Pres. Clinton) were giving him.

From the 3rd person point of view, humans are much more likely to view a decision with bad consequences as due to something internal to the person making the choice. I.e. a Bush critic will see the decision as due to something internal to president Bush ("he was stupid", "He wanted the oil", "he is a warmonger", etc.).

The same biases will simply reverse in case of a decision with good consequences. (i.e. a bush critic will attribute the declines in violence in post-surge iraq to the Iraqis rather than anything bush did).

We are in no better position to explain someone else than we are ourselves. Our biases simply reverse.

It is also wierd for someone like Bob, who claims to be a big fan of evolutionary psychology, to claim to be an economic determinist. Part of the renewed popularity of darwinian psychology was Dawkins (and others) claim that much behavior can be explained in terms of group/kin selection--i.e. causal forces from 'below' the level of the individual. According to this view, rather than my own material circumstances defining by my concerns, I ought to be just (if not more) concerned about the wealth of my kin and group, rather than my own material status.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 04-19-2008, 08:07 AM
johnmarzan johnmarzan is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Quiapo
Posts: 358
Default Re: Why cling-gate is offensive

mickey was a little mean to bob, from the tone of his voice in the podcast.

as for bob, i hear that he plans to introduce saudi bloggers to BHTV. would be interesting to find out what they are allowed and not allowed to blog about in saudi arabia.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 04-19-2008, 09:00 AM
Baltimoron Baltimoron is offline
Deactivated User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Busan, South Korea (ROK)
Posts: 1,690
Send a message via Skype™ to Baltimoron
Default Re: Why cling-gate is offensive

I'm excited about the new Saudi blood, too. I just hope they aren't aping MSM talking points.
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 04-20-2008, 08:53 PM
pod2 pod2 is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: NY
Posts: 213
Default Re: We Take Our Marxism Vulgar

I'm a little bit confused about all of the commentary about cling-gate. Several things:

No one seems to ever mention that, among all of the things on the list of things that people "cling" to (Mickey's right-- that's the problematic word, not "bitter." "Stick" would be a synonym that would have produced none of the backlash, yet would have made the exact same point.) is 'anti-trade sentiment.'


Second, Obama's analysis was not that these rubes don't understand and are acting irrationally. His comments, in SF, Charlie Rose, and Terre Haute on April 11 explicitly describe the rational choices that small town people make-- Democrats and Republicans have both abandoned their communities economically in the last two or three administrations, so they "stick" to issues that are meaningful to them outside of economics. Why vote along economic 'marxist' materialist lines when it makes no material difference in their lives. Better to vote along cultural ways that do make a cultural difference to their identities.

Actually, Obama's analysis was very explicitly non-materialist, non-marxist. He explains how voters can rationally vote against their economic interest. Because voters do not trust Washington to help them in an economic sense, they vote in ways that Marx would not predict.

The attempt to paint Obama's remarks as vulgar marxist, or telling us that they are condescending is kind of priceless. how is voting along economic lines rational if Clinton sold Pennsylvania working class voters down the river just as the Bush administrations have? It isn't.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 04-21-2008, 01:18 PM
dougfretty dougfretty is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2
Default Re: We Take Our Marxism Vulgar

Bob--

Your perspective always fascinates and enlightens, but you need to listen more carefully to Mickey.

He supplies you with a very fertile question (what's the difference between lecturing the Muslim world about the economy-jihad complex and lecturing small-town America about the economy-bigotry complex), and you dismiss the question on its face. Pretend for a moment that Mickey is one of your sociology profs. or public intellectuals, whom you pay respect with probative, meaning-of-life dialogs, and engage him in the same way.

Old couples who have been married for years start to become deaf to one another. Bob, please don't start sounding like Mickey's long-suffering spouse.

Last edited by dougfretty; 04-21-2008 at 01:20 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 04-21-2008, 05:01 PM
thouartgob thouartgob is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 765
Default Re: Mickey lets us down!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thus Spoke Elvis View Post
I think Mickey's using "Britney Spears concert" as a euphemism for something else that young professors would miss if they moved to Saudi Arabia. I'm sure living in Saudi Arabia for an extended period would be an interesting cultural experience, but I'm thinking that most red-blooded Western men would probably prefer to live in a society where women wore a little less clothing and seemed a little more available.
Well, professionals of any stripe like money so I feel that they will not suffer for talent. Besides with lots of money there are plenty of ways to quench one's thirst in that arena. Just follow all of the petroleum engineers and western middle-men that have been around for years to whatever sinful oasis is available.:-)
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 04-21-2008, 05:26 PM
thouartgob thouartgob is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 765
Default Re: Why cling-gate is offensive

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wonderment View Post
Bob wonders why the right-wing is dwelling so much on the dynamics of Obama's cling comment.
You don't have to wonder much about why right-wingers are dwelling. This Johathan Chait article gives you a flavor of the hypocrisy of one set of elites howling in outrage another another set of elites.

I can't help but steal a quote.

Quote:
"The victim-hero class is the object of competitive flattery and the subject of mutual accusations of disrespect. You can't read a Peggy Noonan paean to real America--"a healthy and vibrant place full of religious feeling and cultural energy and Bible study and garage bands and sports-love and mom-love and sophistication and normality"--without thinking of a junior faculty member extolling the dignity of Guatemalan peasant women. Bill O'Reilly's or Tim Russert's endless invocations of their working-class backgrounds are the equivalent of the campus activist who introduces every opinion by saying "As a woman of color . . . ." (The one difference being that the latter really is a woman of color, while the former are multimillionaires who retain only the most remote connection to blue-collar life.)"
Reply With Quote
 


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:27 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.