Friday, April 08, 2005

Your biggest problem isn't with the neighbors

A comment by Mark at Zenpundit:
Thursday, April 07, 2005

An Academic Question
Published: April 5, 2005

My Response to Mark's post at Zenpundit:
The overall point that you are making in this post is a valid one and would be worth debating - if issues today could be discussed rationally. The days when solutions could be brought about by a general consensus, once the intellectual and political debates had occurred, have passed. That once more breathable atmosphere does not exist today and has not existed since the early 90's. That is the time when the republicans, of which I was a member, decided that their guiding principle would be, from that day forward, to win at any ideological cost. This pursuit would occur no matter what constituency could be collected under the same roof. Their mantra would be that rational debate and consensus is for losers.

Your beginning admissions in this post seems to convey a belief on your part that those of your non-wingnut persuasion are still in charge of this stitched together "winning" party. The emphasis on the word winning is important only because it seems to be enough of a payment to have appeased the former ideological pure in the party. You seem to believe that the wingnuts (those that have helped the republicans establish their current dominance) will eventually be reined in. The only basis I can find for this thinking is that you must still think, at this late hour in your party, that thought will prevail over the religious emotions that have been tapped, and that ideological pure beliefs will be pursued over the keeping of power. With a rational group of people this might indeed be true. Unfortunately you would have to be completely hypnotized to believe that the current facade, structure, and constituency of the Republican Party is made of rational bricks. The Republican Party of today is constructed of mud, straw, and faith - a faith that reason, debate, and consensus should not stand in the way of what their constituents believe to be right.

To conclude I will just say that your arguments against Paul Krugman's editorial in passed days would have been worth debating. However, lighting a match of reason during a raging fire of ignorance is not a very productive pursuit. In my view your time would be better spent saving your own home from its more irrational occupants then tearing at the shingles of your disrespectful neighbors house.