Comments on: Reification and the Undistributed Middle… http://www.epistemographer.com/2003/07/03/reification-and-the-undistributed-middle/ Now with improved Wordpress goodness! Tue, 06 Jan 2009 09:27:48 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Olga Giles http://www.epistemographer.com/2003/07/03/reification-and-the-undistributed-middle/#comment-184701 Olga Giles Thu, 13 Nov 2008 03:22:41 +0000 http://www.epistemographer.com/?p=11#comment-184701 8ztk6741tpzqa1rq 8ztk6741tpzqa1rq

]]> By: David Thomas http://www.epistemographer.com/2003/07/03/reification-and-the-undistributed-middle/#comment-9 David Thomas Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.epistemographer.com/?p=11#comment-9 Interesting. But is the term "conservative" any less reified or, for that matter, any "safer"? Admittedly, I live in a densely democratic population (Baltimore) and am exposed to far less liberal-bashing as a result. But I've gotten a sense of "conservative" or "republican" as equally repugnant stances. This is most prevalent, for me, in terms of popular comedic entertainment (e.g. "The Simpsons" or "The Daily Show") and some dramatic (e.g. "The West Wing"). Of course, maybe this just means that liberals are better writers. Interesting. But is the term “conservative” any less reified or, for that matter, any “safer”? Admittedly, I live in a densely democratic population (Baltimore) and am exposed to far less liberal-bashing as a result. But I’ve gotten a sense of “conservative” or “republican” as equally repugnant stances. This is most prevalent, for me, in terms of popular comedic entertainment (e.g. “The Simpsons” or “The Daily Show”) and some dramatic (e.g. “The West Wing”).

Of course, maybe this just means that liberals are better writers.

]]> By: Justin http://www.epistemographer.com/2003/07/03/reification-and-the-undistributed-middle/#comment-10 Justin Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.epistemographer.com/?p=11#comment-10 This is a week late but... Each side is doing their damndest to villify the other, and the construction of such a choice ultimately benefits both of them ("Donate to X before X's opponent irrevocably screws up the planet!") The most tiring but inexplicably effective tactic is co-opting "the American people" as in "The American people won't stand for a candidate who raises their taxes." Variations include "The American taxpayer", "brave and proud New Yorkers", and "patriots everywhere." Since the early 90s, the conservative movement as we know it has worked harder and hasn't been above smear tactics and infantile behavior. By contrast the more liberal/progressive folks got arrogant when Clinton won, mistaking intellectual backing and personal conviction for popular approval. This came to a hilt last year when the Democrats' "anyone's better than a Republican" strategy backfired miserably. Plus many liberals are uncomfortable sinking to the mock-furiosity of right wing talk show hosts. Whether or not you agree with the Republican platform, a small child can understand it-- lower taxes, smaller government, strong military, lots of American flags and khaki pants. Clinton succeeded with simple slogans: "I feel your pain", "Building a Bridge", "It Takes a Village". Gore couldn't follow suit. But the pendulum may be swinging back. The press is actually starting to challenge Bush, Democrats are returning to the offensive, Al Franken remains funnier than Ann Coulter, and we all become a bit more liberal when we're losing our jobs and the economy's tanking. This is a week late but…

Each side is doing their damndest to villify the other, and the construction of such a choice ultimately benefits both of them (“Donate to X before X’s opponent irrevocably screws up the planet!”) The most tiring but inexplicably effective tactic is co-opting “the American people” as in “The American people won’t stand for a candidate who raises their taxes.” Variations include “The American taxpayer”, “brave and proud New Yorkers”, and “patriots everywhere.”

Since the early 90s, the conservative movement as we know it has worked harder and hasn’t been above smear tactics and infantile behavior. By contrast the more liberal/progressive folks got arrogant when Clinton won, mistaking intellectual backing and personal conviction for popular approval. This came to a hilt last year when the Democrats’ “anyone’s better than a Republican” strategy backfired miserably. Plus many liberals are uncomfortable sinking to the mock-furiosity of right wing talk show hosts.

Whether or not you agree with the Republican platform, a small child can understand it— lower taxes, smaller government, strong military, lots of American flags and khaki pants. Clinton succeeded with simple slogans: “I feel your pain”, “Building a Bridge”, “It Takes a Village”. Gore couldn’t follow suit.

But the pendulum may be swinging back. The press is actually starting to challenge Bush, Democrats are returning to the offensive, Al Franken remains funnier than Ann Coulter, and we all become a bit more liberal when we’re losing our jobs and the economy’s tanking.

]]>