[FRIAM] wackos

[Steve Smith]

Dave -

Your reference to Science Fiction tropes reminds me of Larry Niven's
"Footfall" wherein an alien species somewhat resembling Elephants
"lands" on humanity with all four feet heavily and we, in our
monkey-selves respond hyper-aggressively and clamber our way
(metaphorically) up these huge creature's legs to eventually drag them
down.   As I remember the arc of the plot going, humans are vastly
outdone by these (advanced technologically) creatures who seem hell-bent
on "stomping us into the ground".   It took an anthropologist/zoologist
(by perspective if not training) to recognize that as some human battles
got the upper hand, that the "elephants" would "roll over" and being the
angry monkeys we are, we would use their vulnerability to "finish them
off", after all, they had been "stomping us into the ground" for
months/years by that time, so we had to use the upper hand given us.  
What was recognized was the similarity of these "elephantine creatures"
to terrestrial elephants and that they were sincere in their submission
to our (rarely but occasional) superior ability in battle.   The amateur
*-ologist convinced someone in a position of authority in the military
to *try* offering a formalized (ritualized) "submission" to the aliens
which yielded the hoped-for results.   This opened the door to a
negotiation which had heretofore been ignored/rebuffed... as if the
alien "elephants" did not understand negotiating with a "rival" until
there had been a test of ability/will/strength between them, and the
"monkey's" insistence to just fight harder when outmatched seemed insane
to them.   As it ended (I think), it turned out that the "elephants" 
were refugees from a dying solar system just looking for a habitable
place to settle, and were quite advanced
spiritually/intellectually/technologically and happy to coexist with
us... particularly well since they were herbivorous and also had plenty
of tech/art to offer us as a "companion species" if we would just quit
being so brutal when confronted, and submit when bested!  

I don't pretend this translates directly to our current red/blue,
right/left problem, but there may be some useful ideas in there.   Mary
and I both came from Gun-toting, extraction-industry, red-state,
red-neck stock and are both often *appalled* at what our family's and
(former and current) neighbors find to be "reasonable" and "justified"
(broadly Trumpism at it's worst) and yet on any given topic, we can
understand (if not agree with their positions)...   My own family is
more problematic (in my opinion) than Mary's I feel like her brothers
come by and maintain their limited world-view more rightly... no
advanced education, strong blue-collar/extractive jobs, travel limited
to 2 year stints on ships in the Navy, annual pilgrimages to Sturgis and
one-price cruises or guided scuba expeditions with groups of their own
"kind".  My sister and her husband have traveled/lived the world, have
advanced educations and are part of the worldwide network of advanced
Transcendental Meditators who got up at 5AM (AZ time daily to meditate
(pray?) together to smooth the 2020 election with their karmic
resonance).... they are (decades late) on board with climate change,
COVID-is-real and being honest about immigration pressures (finally) but
were full up Trumpians until COVID.  They are just "judgemental and
sour" people when it comes to evaluating other's
abilities/motivations/social-standing.  They do fine with people they
actually *meet* and *know* but are quick to dismiss huge swaths of
people because of their differences?  I think this style of dismissal of
others is what you (Dave) keep calling *us* out on, even if the subjects
are a different subset of the population.  I'm just happy I can have
meaningful conversations with one of their three children (and both of
my own and all of Mary's) on these topics.   The baby-boomers (and my
mom who is of the 'Greatest') will just have to age/die out for a lot of
this to change?

- Steve

> In a different thread, Glen wrote:
>
> /"what many of us purport to /*/*want*/*/... common ground with which
> to have a discussion with the right wing wackos in our lives."/
>
> Although I have heard people express a desire for such conversations
> and questions about finding a common ground upon which to base them —
> I do not believe a single one of them was honest or sincere.
>
> There is only one circumstance in which a 'conversation' with a wacko
> has any point: a professional psychiatrist seeking to mitigate the
> mental condition of a patient.
>
> Perhaps "right wing wackos" is simply a label (RWW) for a group and
> not an assertion of their sanity.
>
> If RWW are an alien species, ala Martians, then
> conversation/dialog/exchange might be quite useful and even beneficial
> — the SciFi trope of "look how much we could learn from someone with
> such a different perspective." An alternative SciFi trope: "we can
> never understand each other so we must be implacable enemies and seek
> to annihilate each other;" is also possible. (Unfortunately, I think
> the second trope is far more descriptive of the majority of
> left-vs-right rhetoric these days.)
>
> If RWW are simply an exotic human culture; conversation, dialogue,
> exchange; all are eminently desirable.
>
> However, there are preconditions — maybe just one — the ethical
> principle of cultural anthropology: relativism. There are no objective
> criteria by which you can judge the 'correctness' the 'rightness' the
> 'fitness' (there is no cultural evolution theory analogous to Darwin
> with species) or the 'morality' among cultures. To think otherwise is
> ethnocentrism.
>
> Ethnocentrism is perfect if your goal is to be a cultural imperialist
> or a missionary, but is not a foundation for constructive dialog or
> conversation.
>
> I love and respect you all, but you seem to me to be one of the most
> ethnocentric (Liberal-Scientism, for want of a better label) cultures
> around.
>
> A common saying about the role of an anthropologist: /"to make the
> strange familiar and the familiar strange."/ An ethnography of the RWW
> would be, in my opinion, quite valuable; and, along with dropping the
> ethnocentrism, prerequisite to any conversation with them. You run the
> risk, however, that your study of the mote in the other's eye will
> craft a lens or a mirror that will reflect the beam in your own.
>
> davew
>
>
>
>
> - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20201201/14cb0d4c/attachment.html>