Score one for the Republicans!
This is actually rather pathetic. This guy, David Mamet, has decided to merely define himself as a conservative now (he pretty much has been for a time now, just "closeted", if you will), because he associates conservatism with a pessimistic view of mankind and liberalism with an optimistic one. It is a chestnut that I am seeing more and more frequently, and, as a staunch pessimist and a liberal, I am left perplexed at the very notion.
Mamet explains one of his plays that demonstrates this dynamic by saying:
Yeah. This is what gets me: what exactly about liberal and conservative political stances suggest that they are "tragic" or "perfectionist" views? The only thing that seems to be pessimistic in a conservative's view is that the government can mess things up (I believe that most non-politicians will concede this point, with a little too much passion), and in regards to admitting criminal and violent natures of human beings (which, of course, the government must be used to quash...). And, by assuming that these ideas are strictly conservative ones, and that liberals must therefore think that government makes everything better, and that humans do not have criminal or violent natures (we do, but it doesn't mean that we shouldn't try to find ways to overcome them), suddenly we are foolishly optimistic utopians. Honestly, if thinking that trying to make improvements in society and human nature is better than letting people gradually strangle each other to death in the name of the status quo is a "perfectionist" view, I will wear the title with pride. No matter how grim I think the odds are, and how poorly I think of the idiotic populace in general. No matter how much I think that people are only motivated by selfish drives as much as any conservative, but still think that a fair, modern economy can't be driven by that alone. Optimist, ahoy.
The play, while being a laugh a minute, is, when it's at home, a
disputation between reason and faith, or perhaps between the conservative (or
tragic) view and the liberal (or perfectionist) view. The conservative president
in the piece holds that people are each out to make a living, and the best way
for government to facilitate that is to stay out of the way, as the inevitable
abuses and failures of this system (free-market economics) are less than those
of government intervention
As a child of the '60s, I accepted as an article of faith that government is
corrupt, that business is exploitative, and that people are generally good at
I assume that, now, he accepts that government is the best thing EVAR (except in regards to the economy...), that business has our best interests at heart, and will never exploit workers or customers in an unregulated market,and that people don't have any conscience at all. Just pure selfishness and evil.
Sigh...anyway, Darth D'Souza is doing much proverbial wanking over this conversion.
Also the left is now defined by shrieking demagogues like Michael Moore, while
intelligent people are keeping their distance or moving out of this menagerie
Ahahahaha. Weak. And the right is defined by George W. Bush. We still win. This is why you don't define half of the country by ONE. DAMN. PERSON.
The folks at the Daily Kos website feigned indifference: "Who really cares?" But
until this time Mamet was regarded as a virtual demigod of American high
culture. Now we can expect the accolades to stop.
Blah, blah, blah. Liberal media. Blah, blah, blah, "I know this is irrelevant, they acknowledge that it is irrelevant, but that is just PREJUDICE"
When Bobby echoes the old liberal nostrum, "Nothing's black and white," he
receives this crushing response: "Nothing's black and white? What about a
[Stabs panda]. What was that? An incredibly weak, overly literal interpretation of a metaphoric reference to relativism and complexity of situations? I couldn't hear it over the bleeding...
While Mamet disclaimed any political motives, you only had to see the play to
recognize that it was about the feminist witch-hunt. Basically a female student
(somewhat reminiscent of a young Hillary Clinton at Wellesley) makes false
allegations of sexual harassment against a well-meaning but incautious liberal
professor. In the name of the sisterhood, she destroys the poor man's
I'll admit that this may happen. But, that hardly serves as a reason to toss out feminism as a whole, or even sexual harassment claims because legitimate cases do happen. And I'll make a play about a gay Satanic liberal professor groping Christian teens to prove it. Hypothetical situations count as proof, right?
Mamet also expressed unabashed love for America, which is something thatI apologize that this isn't our theme song. I apologize that it is for you. I apologize that David Mamet thinks that it is reflective of a "tragic" worldview. And I apologize that you think that any of this is important.
left-wing Democrats only express at their presidential conventions when it is
time to put on a performance for the American people who are watching.
"I no longer need to believe the drivel that is spoken around me," Mamet said.
"I feel lighter already." To which I can only say: welcome home, David Mamet.
There is no possible expression for me to use that properly indicates the correct combination and magnitude of hilarity, irony, and mild disgust that I feel right now. LOL!!!!1!!1 does not suffice.