So did you hear about the woman who was standing next to President Obama at the voting poll today, trying to vote, and was humiliated by her loser of a boyfriend?
“Don’t touch my girlfriend,” the freak told Obama.
“This is a brother who just made a fool out of himself,” Obama commented, looking understandably annoyed.
“I cannot believe this is happening, ” the woman said.
It is really sad to make the news as the girlfriend of a sexist freakazoid.
I hope she dumps him.
Who are all those scary people who followed Monica Lewinsky on Twitter?
The world is a scary, confusing place at times.
Bauman says that the “arousal and beefing – up of emotions” needed to maintain patriotic attachment to a nation has been outsourced to private entities. Patriotism is, in this sense, not that different from all of the other functions that the state has been outsourcing with what I could describe as near desperation: incarceration, education, war – waging, welfare, etc.
I’m very interested in the outsourcing of patriotism as a new practice. Does anybody have examples?
Thinkers on both ends of the political spectrum agree that the nation-state is dying. For the first time in my memory, Marxists and anti – Marxists speak in the same voice on this crucial matter. (In the spirit of full disclosure, I haven’t read Fukuyama ‘ s new book yet, so I can’t say what position he takes. I’ve read his followers, though, and they agree the nation-state is dead.)
The difference between the two sides is in how they see the post – national future. One group believes that the state will manage to preserve itself by dramatically reducing its functions in the areas where we expect it to act and take control while proving its relevance in combating global threats, such as climate change, international terrorism, cyber wars, etc. The other group believes that the state will fail at this task and eventually (not tomorrow or the day after but eventually) humanity will have to move towards a shared global governance. Obviously, this is an enormous shift in human governance that will be accompanied by massive loss of lives, dramatic and often terrifying transformations, etc.
Can you guess which scenario comes from which of the groups on the political spectrum?
And this is from Carlo Bordoni who co-authored State of Crisis with Bauman:
The tragedy of the modern state lies in its inability to implement at a global level the decisions taken locally.
Everything of importance happens at a global level where the decisions made at the state level simply don’t reach. As a result, democratically elected politicians look impotent and irrelevant. Voters get disillusioned and see no point in participating in the political process. Electoral promises become more and more trivial (“we promise not to be as bad as our opponents,” “We promise to be against big government since government decides so little anyway.”)
Electoral campaigns concentrate on silly meaningless issues of whether a candidate treated his dog right or ate tuna conserves as a student. The public treats elections as entertainment because it knows they have little value beyond that.
Bauman says we have to prepare for
e crushingly toilsome leap from the ‘imagined totalities’ of nation-states to the ‘imagined totality’ of humankind.
The EU, he says, is valuable because it is at least an attempt at going in that direction.
All of the problems we are facing today, Bauman says, are globally produced and it is a waste of time to look for their solutions locally.
Let’s hope that the transition from many imagined communities to just one will not cost us as much as the nation-state did.
From Zygmunt Bauman’s recent book:
Our problems are globally produced, whereas the instruments of political action bequeathed by builders of nation – states were reduced to the scale of services territorial nation – states required; they prove therefore singularly unfit when it comes to handle global, extraterritorial challenges.
When earlier today I criticized the Democrats for not offering us much, I didn’t take into account that it is simply not in their power to offer anything along the lines of what we are used to governments offering.
The nation-state might have receded into the past, yet it is hard to unlearn the patterns of its functioning. Here I was, spending the morning in a state of pouty grievance over not being provided with something that it is no longer possible for a political party or government to provide.
The Underside of “Affirmative Consent” http://www.the-american-interest.com/articles/2014/10/19/the-underside-of-affirmative-consent/
Yet another sick creep fantasizing about the sex lives of others instead of having one of her own.
The linked piece reeks of sexual dysfunction. It matters not in the least if authors of such pieces support or denounce Affirmative Consent. As Comrade Stalin used to say, “They are both worse!”
And this is how people justify helicoptering:
I’m a helicopter parent not because I’m controlling, but because there’s just not a lot of room for my kids to fail. If this were the 1960s, when kids could goof off and get bad grades without grave economic consequences, then sure. They could be self-motivated and self-actualized; they could find themselves in Tibet for a year, and we’d be smiling our benevolent smiles from our fixer-upper Victorian front porches as they ambled home from their adventures. But now, if they don’t get into a good college—or worse, start college and don’t finish—they’ve just got a ton of debt they can’t discharge and no job prospects.
Obviously, this is all a heap of total and complete idiocy. The author isn’t even trying to sound credible.
There is not an instance of abuse and exploitation that doesn’t justify itself as being perpetrated solely for the benefit of the abused. This tells us that abusers are very well aware of the damage they are causing. They are setting a trap for their victims when any attempt at liberation turns the victims into ungrateful, thankless creatures. There are few weapons in the abusers’ hands that are stronger than their insistence on receiving gratitude for the abuse they inflicted.
Physical and emotional abuse don’t differ all that much in this sense. I know a woman who used to be beaten into a bloody pulp by her mother on regular occasions. Every time after a beating, she would have to apologize to Mommy for forcing her to beat the daughter for her own good and tiring out her hand while delivering the beatings.
Instead of turning into happy, fulfilled, self-assured over-achievers, however, children of helicoptering, controlling parents end up paying for the damage caused to them by the parental rage (and the need to control other people is just that, rage) by depression, anxiety, eating disorders, addiction. This is the happy, joyous future towards which controlling parents guide their miserable, scared children.