Quote:
|
I'm not really sure what you mean by working outside the current status quo. Because of where I live and what I do, I am surrounded by people extolling "disruption" 24/7 and the word no longer means anything.
|
Your area is a bright spot - the kinda "wild west" status quo I think we all ought to enjoy.
Quote:
|
How do you think the political status quo should be "disrupted"? And don't even talk about destruction, or rendering politics "ineffectual." You don't really mean it, and you don't want to live in Somalia. Those are just empty buzzwords.
|
Why would rendering politics ineffectual put us in Somalia? Politics is already largely ineffectual and the world is doing fine.
If you were looking to amass the greatest level of power on this planet, would you choose to control the ten biggest nations, or the twenty biggest multinational corporations? (Trick Question: If you controlled the top twenty corporations, you'd control a majority percentage of each of the top ten nations.)
Quote:
|
eta: Also, not also "disruption" is good. Mitch McConnell disrupted traditional norms by refusing to give Obama's pick for the Supreme Court a vote. Sarah Huckabee Sanders is disrupting the traditional role of the press secretary by lying from the White House podium. Trump is disrupting the traditional role of DOJ by attacking it. I'm guessing that you don't like these changes, even though they are disruptive.
|
I disagree. I think bad disruption of the kind you describe will cause a whiplash effect. When people realize how much this damages the core of society, they'll demand a return to norms.
However, this may split the country in two. There will be those of us who demand some adherence to objective facts. And there will be the idiots who wish to craft their own realities.
And Huckabee isn't doing anything unique. She's just doing it less cleverly then many predecessors, without plausible deniability.
