Friday, February 05, 2016
Dynamic reasoning
This article at Takimag shows Sanders as a 'hypocrite' who started out life dirt-poor, then used money in venal ways after he finally got it.
Good. Contrary to the author's purpose, this makes me feel better about Sanders. This makes him seem LESS hypocritical, not MORE.
Before this, I was seeing Sanders as the Ideologically Pure type. He reminds me of my original Commie mentor in 1968, who was the Pure type. A political "science" prof who constantly burned with socialist fervor. He actually HAD money ... an inherited farm that paid rent from crops ... but he never USED the money to make his own family comfortable. They continued to live just above poverty. All his money and energy went into The Cause.
Why does this show Sanders as LESS hypocritical? Think in dynamic terms.
Why does a populist politician want to change the system? Not simply because the system is bad. That's a static reason. He wants change so poor people can have better work and better lives.
The feverish ascetic doesn't give his family a better life. They're always waiting while he Serves The Cause. If Sanders is as venal as this article claims, it shows that he PRACTICES WHAT HE PREACHES. When he got power and money, he used both to make his own family more comfortable. Thus he knows what money is for.
Labels: Shack people - Cottage people
¶ 10:47 AM
