LIONEL PODCAST: The SOTU Illusion and Magic Show Defined

SOTU reactions: Are you a bleeding heart liberal or wingnut conservative? Yep, that about describes it. Social media provided the real time Rorschach and ‘tween the snarky memes of #breadbags and #yeswetan and either the fawning paeans from the decidedly partisan Obama minions to the hardcore rejection of anything save a hardcore reaction to anything POTUS uttered even if, as I suspect, they were the exact quotes of Bush 43, it was a perfect example of what American political discourse is all about. Mets versus Yankees. No rhyme, reason or facts.

Too parochial for my tastes. Left-Right. Right-Wrong. The meme. The simplified reduction of the complex into two pockets. Simple. Base. Crony politics. The limited worldview and prism. Heel versus Baby Face. The horrid dreck and blather of the pathetically simplistic marginalizing of the complex. But it makes folks feel superior. It makes folks feel like their in the game because they’ve committed the message to a few words and familiar phrases.

And it’s now critical that you recall the words of Professor Carroll Quigley from his book, “Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our Time.” Keep in mind the role the good professor had in Bill Clinton’s development and political ideology. And also note his considerable work anent secret societies and the like. He pulls back the curtain, reveals the Potemkin village and movie set and shows the world the fallacy of political freneticism. It’s all a work.

“The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to doctrinaire and academic thinkers,” Dr. Quigley wrote. “Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can ‘throw the rascals out’ at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy.”
Today’s installment. This podcast explores the gradations, the differentials, the parsing of popular ideology. And how they define silly personality and culturally-based target labels that miss by a mile anything approximating reality. Any questions?


%d bloggers like this: