tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26340222.post440054305598534779..comments2023-09-28T04:08:46.005-04:00Comments on The Hankster: Party Politics from a Psychological PerspectiveNancy Hankshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17428253702914703243noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26340222.post-68201105846805465642010-07-27T16:01:51.909-04:002010-07-27T16:01:51.909-04:00Thanks Evan for your thoughtful piece and fantasti...Thanks Evan for your thoughtful piece and fantastic illustrations!<br /><br />I'm particularly moved at how you brought it all together with your last, as you promised ;) quote.<br /><br />“These functions are based on the principle of the exclusion of the inappropriate, or unsuitable, which might bring about a deviation from the chosen path. The elements that “belong” are left to a process of mutual equalization, and meanwhile are protected from disturbing influences from outside. Thus after some time they reach their “probable” state, which shows its stability in, say, a “lasting” conviction or a “deeply ingrained” point of view, etc. How firmly such structures are rooted can be tested by anyone who has attempted to dissolve such a structure, for instance to uproot a prejudice or change a habit of thought.”<br /><br />The biggest obstacle to democracy is the 2 party system. Challenging the "way things are" by building a non-ideological independent political movement to reform politics from the ground up, is a series of mighty feats! As a long time activist, I so appreciate your thoughtful and moving contribution to this effort that is being led by growing numbers of independents around the country. Welcome aboard and thanks, JuneJunehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09506463585116439402noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26340222.post-7117347115163599212010-07-24T10:19:28.549-04:002010-07-24T10:19:28.549-04:00Baylah said:
Thank you Evan. I like your grapplin...Baylah said:<br /><br />Thank you Evan. I like your grappling with psychology, philosophy, science and politics.<br /><br />I believe that dualism stands in the way of social, emotional, cultural and political development: Is it body or mind? fact or feeling?, inside or outside?, nurture or nature? Republican or Democrat. In my field, social work, this is expressed as the split between private troubles (fix a person) and public issues (work for political reforms). <br /><br />How do we get out of the either/or fly bottle? I agree Evan that an independent third force is needed to create something new, something developmental for people, for our communities, and our country. We are stuck in what Heiner Muller calls The Frozen Storm. Help, I want out of this 2-system box! <br /><br />I suggest Fred Newman’s “Where’s the magic in cognitive therapy? (a philo/psychological investigation) ” published in Against and for CBT: Towards a Constructive Dialogue?: Amazon.co.uk: Richard House, Del Loewenthal: Books, .<br />http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:ofcOv63lEcUJ:www.eastsideinstitute.org/bibliography/bibliography_assets/CBT.Final.Short.doc+where+is+the+magic+in+cognitive&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us<br /><br />I particularly love your image of a a hand growing out of a foot on a face!!!<br /><br />Baylah WolfeUnknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10700632622158183889noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26340222.post-16710250085264070902010-07-23T21:01:22.459-04:002010-07-23T21:01:22.459-04:00I find Evan's perspective fascinating. He appe...I find Evan's perspective fascinating. He appears to be a talented and insightful author.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02926576151138529810noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26340222.post-86740963884743332092010-07-23T10:44:49.312-04:002010-07-23T10:44:49.312-04:00An interesting and thought-provoking post. And I ...An interesting and thought-provoking post. And I think Angry Independent hits the nail on the head when he writes:<br /><br />"Two out of touch, heavily monied political parties cannot possibly represent the interests of 300 million people."<br /><br />If we go back to the very beginning of ancient Greek philosophy, Parmenides' theory of THE ONE is based explicitly on the negation of multiplicity. We might say that the form of THE TWO recognizes the insufficiency/incoherence/inconsistency of the One, but still relies on the negation of multiplicity as such, which it attempts to collapse into the One and its Other. In this way, the TWO is arguably more unstable than the ONE because it is self-contradictory, since it negates the condition of its own existence. <br /><br />I also have an extended <a href="http://politeaparty.blogspot.com/2010/07/political-psychology-and-perversion-of.html" rel="nofollow">response to this post at Poli-Tea</a>, which focuses more on the inability of the two-party state to represent the interests of the two-party state and how the principle of party is slowly degrading the principle of representation and the separation of powers.d.erishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09186054212519025557noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26340222.post-92130055054275950012010-07-23T04:07:26.198-04:002010-07-23T04:07:26.198-04:00(Con't)
Meanwhile...while we are stuck dealin...(Con't)<br /><br />Meanwhile...while we are stuck dealing with political gridlock... Countries across Europe, Asia and South America are entering the new global economy and are poised to embraced new energy technologies, etc. Even Canada's economy is the envy of many nations right now. Many of these Countries are able to avoid gridlock for a number of reasons...but the main reasons are... 1). Some are one party States...like China...that can get things done quickly and efficiently. I'm not advocating this form of government...but it is what it is... we will have to compete with this and the fact is, China has a political advantage in that regard. 2). Most other modern nations have multi-party systems where policy is created much more effectively... and with more representation/participation from the public. Many of them have developed austerity plans...after a few weeks...or months of debate. This is a debate that the U.S. can't even start, even after decades of trying. Our political system is grossly inefficient. 3rd and 4th Parties in other Democracies are able to make things happen....not by their size...but due to the fact that they break deadlocks. They also have a moderating impact on Governments all around the World....usually for the better. Look at the UK right now. Cameron can't do anything major without consulting with the Libs. <br /><br />The fact is... the system of "two" isn't working out so well for us anymore. Notice that we are already being surpassed by nations with systems of "one" or systems of "three" or more. <br /><br />If we stay in this system of "two"...we are going to be left behind as a nation. The U.S. will eventually lose its position of strength in the World. Yet, I don't see any major signs that this will change. The two parties are so corrupt, just from a structural standpoint, so beholden to entrenched interests, and influenced by so much money which has perverted the system that Republican and Democratic politicians have no personal incentive to change the course of politics, and thus won't change, even if their selfishness is harming the Country.Brian https://www.blogger.com/profile/07872444863142531165noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26340222.post-37810188365056176532010-07-23T04:04:45.719-04:002010-07-23T04:04:45.719-04:00Using physics and psychology to analyze politics i...Using physics and psychology to analyze politics is definitely an interesting and unorthodox approach.<br /><br />Evan is basically describing an inflexible, almost immovable system system where actual structural change is unlikely by going through any of the normal processes. Why? Because new voices and new ideas face entrenched barriers that are extremely hard to penetrate. The two party system is the norm...and most Americans are hardwired by tradition not to challenge it. They are hardwired not to even imagine a multi-party system where the varied interests of all Americans could be represented, and where gridlock could be broken. They can't even conceive this...because the traditional 2 Party barriers have been up for so long. But it creates a kind of complacency that the 2 Parties perceive as a license to do whatever they want....which just creates more disulosionment among the population and makes matters worse in the long run. <br /><br />Evan takes a longer, more philosophical route to reach many of the same conclusions that disillusioned independents have made - that the current 2 Party system just doesn't work...especially in a Country that is more socially, culturally, ethnically and economically diverse than it has ever been. Two out of touch, heavily monied political parties cannot possibly represent the interests of 300 million people. They can't properly represent even half that. And it's frustrating to see the structural barriers holding. The U.S. has, in essence, become a failed State...although only politically at this point. It will take many more years for other segments of the system to start unravelling which would make the problems more noticeable. Right now...everything appears o.k... but with political gridlock in Washington....the U.S. will not be able to maintain enough economic, social and political progress to keep up with the rest of the World. Not to mention the fact that we have a budget that cannot be sustained.Brian https://www.blogger.com/profile/07872444863142531165noreply@blogger.com