Jane Smiley on George W. Bush and deserters from the Bush administration

[unixronin]

I quote (article link from ozarque):

Bruce Bartlett, The Cato Institute, Andrew Sullivan, George Packer, William F. Buckley, Sandra Day O'Connor, Republican voters in Indiana and all the rest of you newly-minted dissenters from Bush's faith-based reality seem, right now, to be glorying in your outrage, which is always a pleasure and feels, at the time, as if it is having an effect, but those of us who have been anti-Bush from day 1 (defined as the day after the stolen 2000 election) have a few pointers for you that should make your transition more realistic.

Full text behind the link.  (EDIT:  Missing link fixed.  I told you all I was spoon-depleted today .... here's additional evidence.  I didn't realize I'd omitted the actual link until cymrullewes pointed it out to me.)

I should observe that I don't agree with everything Jane Smiley has to say here.  To pick out but one example, Jane is clearly an advocate of affirmative action; I consider it an ill-considered idea in the short term, and a really bad, directly harmful idea in the long term.  It's one of those things that Seemed Like A Good Idea At The Time when there was a need to Be Seen To Do Something, even if it was the wrong thing, but which in the final analysis not only does not solve the problems it was meant to address, but has actually created additional problems of its own.

Nevertheless, occasional objections aside, most of what she has to say is pretty much on the mark.  We have the government that we have today as a direct result of the policies and practices that were Business As Usual in the corporate sector which has, for decades now, had a level of influence upon American politics out of all proportion to any actual entitlement for influence that it should possess.  Figuratively speaking, we allowed the fox to help write the specifications for the new henhouse, and now we're surprised that it's full of weasels.

Comments

[ilcylic.livejournal.com]

Jane is clearly an advocate of affirmative action; I consider it an ill-considered idea in the short term, and a really bad, directly harmful idea in the long term.

How could institutionally claiming that Black people are so inferior that they can't possibly compete with White people without assistance be a long term harm? </sarcasm>

"Oh, hrmmm. Well, Dr. Stevens is black, you see. I wonder if he actually passed his classes, or if his bar was lower than the white doctor's."

-Ogre

[ilcylic.livejournal.com]

Racism might have died an unlamented death in this country, but you kept it alive with phrases like "welfare queen" and your resistance to affirmative action and taxation for programs to help people in our country with nothing, or very little. You opted not to take the moral high ground and recognize that the whole nation would be better off without racism, but rather to increase class divisions and racial divisions for the sake of your own comfort, pleasure, and profit.

Holy shit. She's on crack, and lots of it.

How does declaring that a certain racial subgroup doesn't need to perform as well in order to receive mandated benefit do anything but "increase class divisions and racial divisions"?

Not to mention her claim that we have anything even vaguely resembling an unregulated free-market.

-Ogre

[unixronin.livejournal.com]

That is, indeed, one part of it. Another aspect is that under affirmative action, you often don't have to actually be able to do the job; all you need to do is be the "most disadvantaged minority" applicant and plausibly appear to be at least minimally qualified on paper.

[ilcylic.livejournal.com]

Actually, that aspect bothers me less than the fact that AA firmly ingrains the notion that blacks are actually inferior in the national psyche.

-Ogre

[unixronin.livejournal.com]

/nod

I wasn't ranking the two points, just calling out that one as well. AA was a really bad idea that, far from solving the problem, actually perpetuates it.

[bfudlmint.livejournal.com]

I've heard of Guy Smiley, but who is Jane Smiley?

[unixronin.livejournal.com]

Liberal pundit, apparently. I'm not personally familiar with her.

[bbwoof.livejournal.com]

Figuratively speaking, we allowed the fox to help write the specifications for the new henhouse, and now we're surprised that it's full of weasels.

Oh, that's poetry! Well said!