‘Actually, Generalizing Is A Good Idea’

Dr Sanity, in All Trees And No Forest:

How many times…have you heard the trolls scream repeatedly about how I lump all people of a certain political belief into the category of “the left”; or how I generalize the behavior of a “small” group of deranged Muslims as “Islamic”. No, no, no! they all cry–this is unfair; this is totally subjective on your part, Dr. Sanity; this is completely invalid!

…How is it surprising that rhetoric in today’s world has descended into vicious ad hominem attacks–such attacks are inevitable when you can only talk about individual trees and not the forest in which they dwell. Why do you suppose that effective policies can never seem to be formulated or implemented to deal with pressing problems (no matter who is in charge) –when problems can only be conceptualized as inescapably subjective, and therefore limited in scope?

Here’s the deal: Your voice as an individual doesn’t really count unless you are opining on something that affects you, personally. In fact, in matters that do not affect you personally, your first obligation is to your community. You cannot expect or demand that your community support and value your individuality if you do not support and value your community. Supporting and valuing your community means that you subjugate your own desires and wants for the greater good of the community.

Here’s another bit of reality: Simply having an opinion or belief does not mean that belief or opinion is as credible- or more credible- than any other.

There are many people who believe that Stalin, Pol Pot, Che Guevara and Fidel Castro are ‘people’s heroes’ notwithstanding the blood on their respective hands.

It safe to generalize that the people who believe that are morally bankrupt. How nice they are to kittens and spotted owls is irrelevant.

There are those who believe that the violent acts of the Earth Liberation Movement are merited because the ‘rape’ and the ‘Holocaust’ committed by the suburban developers is equivalent to real rape or the Holocaust of Nazi era Germany.

It safe to generalize that those who share those beliefs also share a kind moral and ethical leprosy.

There are many in the Middle East that believe they have been charged with ‘finishing the job Hitler started.’ They see that as a kind of sacred responsibility, a godly calling.

It is safe to generalize that those who share those beliefs are evil. If they are not actively evil, they facilitate and enable evil.

In fact, we are supposed to generalize much of the time, because it is by generalizing that societies work.

We presume most people will stop for a red light and allow traffic to proceed safely. Notwithstanding that precious little Emily or the well-endowed-with-self-esteem Andrew might be in a hurry, we presume they will respect the conventions that society needs to stay functioning.

Sports requires us to keep score. In the real world, there are winners and there are losers. In fact, in the real world, there are lots of people smarter and more important than you, notwithstanding what your mother says.

Children need to master certain academic and critical thinking skills. Simply demanding that precious little Emily or Andrew be admitted to Harvard despite their mediocrity will not make them any smarter. Someone else’s child will be smarter, get better grades and be more attractive- and everyone will know it.

Actually, generalizing is a good idea, because when we generalize, we do not have to bother wasting time listening to the opinions of those with a proven track record of irrelevance and less than stellar thinking.

As Dr Sanity notes, individual opinion cannot usurp reality- no matter how often precious Markos or Janie stomp their feet.

Machetes, Culture And Other Classy Stuff

The Anchoress unsheaths a machete size scalpel. Commenting on John Kerry’s whiny, defiant and reluctant apology she pulls out a pearl of a quote:

“A stiff apology is a second insult. The injured party does not want to be compensated because he has been wronged; he wants to be healed because he has been hurt.” — Gilbert K. Chesterton,).

Poor John Kerry- he just doesn’t get it. To be succint- if he lacks the judgment to understand if and when an apology is needed (a skill learned in kindergarten, mastered in grade 2), is his the kind of judgment we want in DC?

Also be sure to read NYT Just Out And Out Lies. The Anchoress assembles some terrific links, that taken together, really hit home. You have to read them all- otherwise, it’s like missing the some of the body and the punch line of a great joke (as example, see this).

See Shrinkwrapped’s Arab Culture And Democracy. His ideas and conclusions are nuanced, sublime- and offer what are dark insights.

The questions I am raising here are clearly quite complex and this post does not mean to offer a definitive statement, however, if history is our guide, the near future of Islam looks grim.

In both Germany and Japan during WWII we were facing enemies in which their cultural tendency to support their racial superiority and aggression toward the other were major elements of their national character. WWII killed a significant portion of the most fanatic supporters of such beliefs. Young men were, after all, the major carriers of the memes and you could argue that the post-war progression to democracy of Germany and Japan depended on the elimination of a large portion of this cohort. In a single generation, major cultural change took place in both societies.

In our modern way of “kinder and gentler” warfare, we have largely spared the young men of Islam who carry the cultural/religious memes of violence and intolerance of others, intolerance and fear of women’s sexuality, and of religious rather than racial superiority. These young men didn’t return home and become members of the Rotary Club. All they knew was aggression, channeled outward, and they naturally did what they do best. It is highly doubtful that these young men can ever be engaged in the political process.

In order for us to face the challenges that are a part of realities, we must understand what it we are facing. Shrinkwrapped’s post offers readers an excellent overview of what some of the foundational and defining issues are all about. His post is a must read.

Kate, at Small Dead Animals, offers up some real food for thought. In “I Say This As A Democrat,” she quotes and links to Orson Scott Card.

“If control of the House passes into Democratic hands, there are enough withdraw-on-a-timetable Democrats in positions of prominence that it will not only seem to be a victory for our enemies, it will be one.

Unfortunately, the opposite is not the case — if the Republican Party remains in control of both houses of Congress there is no guarantee that the outcome of the present war will be favorable for us or anyone else.

But at least there will be a chance.”

Read the whole post. As usual, Kate comes up with stuff that is ‘a cut above.’

Firedog Puddles

Jane Hamsher is author of the blog Firedog Lake. She is also the also the author of Joe Lieberman’s double digit lead over Ned Lamont in the Connecticut’s senate race.

In fact, Hamsher’s position as a ’strategist’ for Mr Lamont (a position she first denied), turned out to be a very effective strategy for the Lieberman campaign, energizing a lot of Democrats, Republicans and independents to commit their vote to Mr Lieberman (we pointed that out in a comment and shortly thereafter had our remarks removed. Like Kim Jung Il’s North Korea, it seems FDL is a ‘comrades only’ paradise).

Like Markos Moulitsas, her support has turned out to be the ‘kiss of death’ for the candidate she endorses, Ned Lamont.

In a classical case of denial, a recent post on her blog announced triumphantly that Ned Lamont Kicks GOP Bullies In The Nads, implying as if her vaunted ’strategy’ and ‘analysis’ might overcome that Lieberman double digit lead. The Dems have all but given up on Lamont- and if Ned had any ‘nads himself, he’d quit throwing his own money away and admit the money paid to those ’strategists’ and ‘analysts’ that conned him would have been better spent elsewhere.

Another post highlight’s the depth of Ms Hamsher’s pathology. In Hilary Clinton And Rush Limbaugh Trash John Kerry, Ms Hamsher manages to trash what may be the best chance the Democrats have at a viable shot in the 2008 election. In John Kerry and The Mufti, we noted that

Historically, Democrat candidates were ‘of the people.’ Kerry is a pretend blue-blood (living off his wife’s fortune) that has yet to decipher that the Kennedy clan political successes were achived because the Kennedy’s were portrayed as ‘real people,’ despite their wealth and because the Kennedy’s were seen to be icons to which every American could aspire.

There is no long list of anybody wanting to be just like John Kerry.

Well, perhaps Ms Hampsher and her readers are the exception, but in the end, they are in the minority. In the end, not even union leaders could have been be relied on to deliver the vote to the likes of John Kerry.

While Hillary Clinton may not be everybody’s cup of tea, she is holds an undeniable appeal to many voters. Ms Hamsher doesn’t share many of Mrs Clinton’s ideas, so Mrs Clinton is to be trashed. What Ms Hamsher does not mention is how many other democrats suggested that Mr Kerry apologize. In Hamsherland, a brilliant strategic political analyst can miss a 24 hour cycle of Dems doing just that and not be called to account. In Hamsherland, you can fail to notice how few Dems came to the defense of Mr Kerry and allowed him twist in the wind. It seems as if in Hamsherland, brilliant and strategic political analysts believe that if you click your heels three time, the problem will go away and nobody will notice.

Clearly, Ms Hamsher’s depth is equal to that of her blog, Firedog Lake. She and the lake are about as deep as a puddle.

Ms Hamsher can’t abide anyone who doesn’t see eye to her with her vision and her clearly skewed version- of reality.

No matter the outcome, we predict that post election, Ms Hamsher will play the wounded puppy and claim GOP voter fraud and voter suppression.

We wish Ms Hamsher great success in her career as a political strategist and analyst. We hope that she graces the campaign of many more candidates who share her vision, and we wish her the same success as she brought Ned Lamont.

Lastly, we would encourage Ms Hamsher to return to the basics.