Comments on The Pensive Quill: Getting Off the Pot

Ouch..!

2009-04-03T10:08:00.000+01:00

Ouch..!

Sophie, the point was never that authoritarianism ...

2009-04-01T20:20:00.000+01:00

Sophie, the point was never that authoritarianism lies behind 'shit or get off the pot'. That was the phrase used to hang the article on. Authoritarianism lay behind the sentiment expressed not the phrase which is pretty much what you say it is.
W are not merely discussing state power versus individual freedoms in a democracy. We are discussing abnormal state power undermining civil liberties.
If you can cite where I support a one size fits all model I will gladly discuss it with you. I don’t believe one size fits all. Government intervention can destroy freedoms or enhance it. How are people to be free from poverty, for example, without government intervention? Hardly the uninhibited market.
Nor do I believe those who disagree with socialism should be ostracised. If you can find where I have stated this please cite it. I have never thought Sinn Fein were a socialist party so I am not sure what the relevance of your point is.
So I more than any other socialist fall into the contradictory position of calling for socialism that encroaches on dissent. The distinction might flatter me but it is hardly any more true for that. How I earned it I have no idea. I don’t favour any system that curbs free inquiry or freedom of opinion. Authoritarian socialism does not have me in its fan club.

‘If you really and truly want individual liberty can you really be a socialist?’ An interesting question but ultimately the argument can be made that socialism emancipates more than it restricts. To deny that the tensions you flag up do not exist would be futile. How to deal with them is probably the challenge for socialists who want a more democratic socialism than we have had up to now.

I don't think authoritanism lies behind 'shit or g...

2009-03-30T13:07:00.000+01:00

I don't think authoritanism lies behind 'shit or get off the pot'. I believe its one of those one liners used by people in their everyday lives because most of us get on with things and don't intellectualise all things all the time. I think we look for consistency, when consistency doesn't really exsist in ideas or in life. Most people want a position laid out for them all nice and neat.

This is an authoritarian impulse masquerading as democratic discourse.

I don't think so. I think you are really discussing 'power'. State power vs individual freedoms in a democracy.

Lets look at democracy, and the state vs the individual. Socialists like yourself call for government intervention and at the same time greater freedoms for the individual. Socialism, especially of ideas, a one size fits all mentality, and if a person steps outside it then they are ostracised. Thats Sinn Feins position, they claim to be socialists, with their socialism freedom for the individual is limitated. But all socialists fall into this contradictory position, even you who calls for dissent. Especially you. Greater freedom for the individual has led to greater involvement of the state. The welfare state can question and intrude in every intimate area of our lives, and yet we want greater individual freedoms.

Under a socialist govt the state has grown and individual freedoms restricted. If you really and truly want individual liberty can you really be a socialist?

Fionnchú, a thought provoking way of putting it. T...

2009-03-29T20:46:00.000+01:00

Fionnchú, a thought provoking way of putting it. The balancing of ideological commitment with what is going on alongside it is a struggle against fanaticism and zealotry

I appreciate your remarks on the PSNI, the need fo...

2009-03-29T20:21:00.000+01:00

I appreciate your remarks on the PSNI, the need for common decency between foes in a civilized polity, and the essential commitment to an equality based on respect if not perfect agreement which all aspire towards in a civilized polity. Unless we learn to balance our own ideological commitment with our own ability to listen and live alongside those with whom we disagree, how can anywhere we claim to love as a land and a culture be a place and a people worth the struggle? Thirty years of recent strife have been followed by fifteen of far less strife. Not perfect, not perhaps what we wanted to the nth degree, but it's some progress.

For retreat from such an understanding: Atul Gawande in the "New Yorker" on solitary confinement as torture.