David Mamet in Village Voice: Why I am no longer a brain-dead liberal

second place is a set of steak knives...

 

WILL YOU GO TO LUNCH?

 

Doesn't sound like he was a brain-dead liberal, just brain dead. Anyone who thinks one political philosophy has all the answers is just plain lazy. Perhaps conservatives see the world as it is and liberals see the world they'd like it to be. Frankly, both philosophies have their merits. I think you could say "liberalism" is more entrepreneurial when it comes to new ideas, while conservatism is more rooted in the idea that one person can make an impact. That said, the current political parties bear no such resemblance to "liberalism" and "conservatism." I can't believe it took Mamet this long to figure this crap out.

 

I love Mamet.

But when he can come back to us and favorably reconcile our currrent Chief Executive with the sustained effort he and his thugs have turned in towards drilling endless holes in the Constitution, let us know, huh?

 

And you let us know when you find the part where he said he supported our current Chief Executive or any of his actions.

Read my post above (and his whole piece, if you haven't). It's a matter of philosophy. You can decide that your general feelings about the world tend toward a certain way of thinking without it meaning you support a political party or a specific person.

 

Indeed.
He basically set up a straw man of himself as stereotypical-hippy-dippy-America-is-evil liberal, then knocked it down. If that's really what he used to think, fine, but he should get out in the world once in awhile before he ascribes that philosophy to everyone else who considers themselves a liberal (and yes, I'm proud to).
As for his "most people I know are just trying to make it through the day, therefore America's NOT evil, therefore I'm actually a conservative" line of reasoning, is fine, as far as it goes. But just because everyone's trying to make it through the day doesn't mean there aren't lots of things beyond the control of him or me or any individual that make it harder to do that and hold us back as a country.
"Liberal" politics, to me anyway, is primarily a way to find collective solutions to those big, collective problems, as opposed to the "conservative" approach of letting us all fend for ourselves, regardless of where we start. His old boogeymen like the "big bad military" and George W. Bush don't really have anything to do with it.

 

Very solid, STL.
I agree all the way.

 

Can I note that some of the more liberal experts have either avoided this or have just not scheduled a commentary?

 

"A, I, D, A: Attention, Interest, Decision, Action. Attention: Do I have your attention? Interest: Are you interested? I know you are because it's fuck or walk. You close or you hit the bricks. Decision. Have you made your decision, for christ!? And action ... "

What a movie.

 

On broadcast and free cable, they excise the word "Christ."

I don't get that.

 

Oh, I read the whole thing, guy. Trust me.

And while I appreciated his appreciation of the Constitution, his steadfast refusal
to acknowledge the current administration's efforts to knock the stuffing out of the document abhorrent.

And while I've frequently taken delight in noting the long-term gross historic
overration of the Kennedy administration (his father having been one of the chief American assholes of the twentieth century, and the sons all absorbed some of it, to varying degrees), Mamet's attempt to somehow equate the climate/timbre of the early 60's and the present times was absurd - to put it kindly.

Play on.

 

A guy don't walk on the lot lest he wants to buy.