I thought of you when I read this:
History was not just something that happened yesterday, but a dynamic force that remained active in the world of today, which was its material product and its consequence. By contrast, the attitude of instrumental reason produced only a version of the past that ascended towards the triumph of the enlightened and democratic societies of the present day.
It seems like this is very much alive in most of the discussions in which you (according to someone) need to learn from history.
Indeed! Good stuff, that.
I just thought that an ice cream van that went past my house was playing The Internationale.
Sadly it wasn’t, I don’t know what it was playing, but now I really want an Internationale playing ice cream van.
I went to see Mark Thomas do his new show last night, about predicting the future. We all made one prediction on a piece of paper and he’d either accept or reject it, then the audience would vote for one of them then make a donation to be bet on it happening.
Oxford was boring, we went with there being a Labour government in the next four years instead of Donald ⊥rump putting pictures of his dick on twitter before his time as president ends.
Apparently in an earlier show he had rejected the suggestion that there would be a hung parliament as being too unrealistic, but Mark hasn’t got a good record on betting on winners.
I think it all stems from the US’s rejection of “Sweet Dreams (Are Made of This)” in favor of Taco’s rendition of “Puttin’ on the Ritz.”
thank you, that is the only proper answer.
Also, what about Merle Haggard’s Okie from Muskogee? Let’s not forget the burning of disco records in Comiskey park.
Seriously, popular music can reveal some interesting dimension of political struggles.
Well, later he said so, but the right sure loved it, taking it literally.
Yup.
It only briefly mentions “neoliberalism” as I understand it (mont pèlerin), and in the vaguest possible terms. Ah well.
Maybe I missed it, but it also doesn’t cover the resentment that radical progressives have for non-neoliberal social liberals who are nowhere to be seen in the early days of fighting for civil/workers rights, yet once they get momentum the liberals come along and take credit for the movement.
Right, because it’s important to keep those grievances simmering,
As usual, it also completely fails to mention the pre-20th C history of the terminology.
Conservative: landed wealth, aristocratic.
Liberal: industrial wealth, capitalist.
Radical: working class, socialist.
Late 20th C America is the only place and time where liberal has ever been seen as the political left. Centre-right is their natural position.
Alternately, it’s important to remember a long history of repeated betrayal, in order to avoid unexpected future betrayal.
We wouldn’t if it didn’t keep fucking happening.
If we left things to the liberals we would still be fighting against anti-sodomy laws across the western world. If they want to take credit they can say they helped. It’s true and we would be happy to share credit, after all we couldn’t have succeeded without their help. Instead we do all the hard work getting things going then we are hidden away because we are an embarrassment to the liberals.
THAT is why we have grievances. Nearly anyone else would have them too under the same circumstances.
And I recognised that.
Can you get the rest of the liberals to recognise that too, instead of choosing to sweep us under the rug? The current relationship is abusive and their side has all the power.
