The following is surely too simple, too progressive, too Hegelian, too half-assed. Only the first and last of these are long-standing problems of mine, I hope. But I was thinking on lesser evilism and Obama-ism and taxonomizing some stages whereby a person who believes in things like Obama's human decency that have been exposed as contradictory retreats from their original position only to set up a new line of defense elsewhere and I saw an easy crossover to religious belief.
Here's the bones:
1. true belief
2. external circumstances as excuse
3. OK, OK, it's not perfect (it's complicated)
4. holding onto a very tiny thread
5. freedom
Here's the meat (just a little; half an ass, remember?):
What is the Bible?
fundamentalist
The Bible is the Word of God, 100% pure truth and goodness.
conservative Christians
The authors of the Bible did the best they possibly could given the level of human knowledge at the time. Let's be realistic, it couldn't have been written better given those conditions.
liberal Christians
OK, the sexism and racism (and certain other things I'm not quite prepared to describe with complete honesty) are a little disturbing. Things have been brought to my attention that I can't explain away with context. Some real head scratchers in there. But...(apology, apology).
Unitarian Universalist
The Bible is loaded with stories of rape and genocide carried out by the protagonists. On the other hand, though I consider myself an atheist, it's not like I can just stop going to Church.
atheist
freedom
Who is Obama?
Democrat fundamentalist
Obama is perfect.
pragmatist
Obama is doing the best he possibly can considering the obstacles, particularly the evil Republicans, corporations; it's the system, man. He needs to give in a little here so he can get the big victories there. Under the circumstances, this is the best anyone could possibly do.
somewhat disappointed pragmatist
Obama isn't perfect. There are things I can't explain away with context though I won't call them by their name. He has made mistakes. I wish he'd cut defense spending more [sic], for example, or take a less hawkish approach to Iran and its nuclear weapons program [sic]. But...(apology, apology).
Chomsky
Obama is a war criminal who is completely owned by Wall Street, just a terrible human being, but he's not quite as bad as the other guy. Yes, he's 99.9% as bad, but that .1% difference demands my nose-holding vote. Though I consider myself an anarchist, it's not like I can just stop going to the voting booth.*
anarchist
freedom
*I'm not entirely convinced of my own point here. And for the record that no one's keeping, I'm quite pro-Noam in general because I see 99% of his arrogance being directed at the worst of the worst.
No comments:
Post a Comment