[FRIAM] Revising the American Revolution

[uǝlƃ ☤>$]

I have no idea how to respond to this post. I don't know what "neener, neener, neener" means, unfortunately. But the grand narrative I'm talking about is the (I suppose Rawlsian?) social contract, including the wall of ignorance. That's distinct, I think, from the altruism of joining a collective effort to take responsibility for the future. The social contract argument seems fundamentally self-serving, especially the wall of ignorance fulcrum. It's a neo-liberal rhetorical device used to bridge the chasm between self-serving and pro-social perspectives.

It's that bridge that is the grand narrative of the social contract. If you don't buy into that story, then the whole thing comes crumbling down. Most of my generation (X) and the Y's and Z's are calling the emperor naked at this point. So when you tell the story of the pre- and post- civil war understanding of the constitution to anyone under, say, 50 years old, you *might* want to consider that.

For some reason, I feel like King Arthur at the base of the French castle in The Holy Grail: https://youtu.be/QSo0duY7-9s


On 10/26/21 1:03 PM, thompnickson2 at gmail.com wrote:
> Grand narratives. Oh, neener, neener, neener.  I assume that we are all endowed with a very fuzzy ruleset from which patterns of association arise.  What's grand about it.  I admit to a desire to join with others in taking responsibility for our future.  I think that such a joining is a "good", even while conceding that, given complexity, that the future we plan for is unlikely to be the future we get. 
> 
> How DARE you pin me with a categorical pin.  Besides, I am much more pomo than you are.  
> 
> As I said: Neener, neener, neener.  And so's your old man. 

-- 
"Better to be slapped with the truth than kissed with a lie."
☤>$ uǝlƃ