Certain conservatives were in an uproar over a video by rapper Stanley Lafleur, in which Lafleur portrays a punk using his EBT card (electronic benefit transfer-- the card is for welfare recipients) to buy snacks and smokes, and even to attempt to buy some pot. Lafleur himself says the video was supposed to parody the people who abuse the welfare system, but many conservatives have interpreted the video as glorifying such abusive behavior.
Meanwhile, another group of conservatives, this time at UC Berkeley, has caused a liberal uproar by staging a bake sale at which prices for baked goods have been adjusted for race and sex (see here). The point of the sale was to highlight the injustice of race- and sex-conscious admissions practices.
What's sad to me is that I think the second group of conservatives would have understood the intent behind Mr. Lafleur's video: the Berkeley kids were engaging in exactly the same sort of parody and provocation. Instead, what I see is inconsistency on both sides of the aisle-- evidence that both liberals and conservatives seem, on the whole, to have a hard time getting their stories straight as to what they believe. Why do some liberals tolerate Lafleur while others denounce the Berkeley conservatives? Why do some conservatives repudiate Lafleur while others support the UC Berkeley experiment?
Personally, I think Lafleur's video is hilarious, and the UC Berkeley "experiment" was justified. But maybe my self-consistency on this point stems from the fact that I'm neither liberal nor conservative. Heh.
_
Tuesday, September 27, 2011
lemme get this straight
7 comments:
READ THIS BEFORE COMMENTING!
All comments are subject to approval before they are published, so they will not appear immediately. Comments should be civil, relevant, and substantive. Anonymous comments are not allowed and will be unceremoniously deleted. For more on my comments policy, please see this entry on my other blog.
AND A NEW RULE (per this post): comments critical of Trump's lying must include criticism of Biden's or Kamala's or some prominent leftie's lying on a one-for-one basis! Failure to be balanced means your comment will not be published.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Here's a video that ought to spark a little uproar, one would think...
ReplyDeleteBut among whom will it spark the uproar?
ReplyDeleteI thought this was a smoother, better-made production than the "Mr. EBT" video by Lafleur, but it made basically the same point. Wasn't as funny, though-- the low production values (and torpid rapping) of the Lafleur vid somehow added to the humor for me.
"Why do some liberals tolerate Lafleur while others denounce the Berkeley conservatives? Why do some conservatives repudiate Lafleur while others support the UC Berkeley experiment?"
ReplyDeleteSimple: because some people judge other people based solely on the labels that are applied to them.
I think the operative word in your question, though, is "some." I find it encouraging that there are people out there trying to go against type and see through the labels to the message.
You're kind of "glass half-full" on this, aren't you. Despite my love of the complexities of dialogue, I find myself wishing for greater ideological consistency, especially as the presidential election year creeps closer.
ReplyDelete"But among whom will it spark the uproar?"
ReplyDeleteWell, among me, for one.
But will it be an uproar against the rapper for "glorifying" EBT abuse, or an uproar against the system the rapper is mocking? Hopefully the latter.
ReplyDelete"You're kind of "glass half-full" on this, aren't you."
ReplyDeleteIt's either that or plunge head first into the black pit of despair.
"Despite my love of the complexities of dialogue, I find myself wishing for greater ideological consistency, especially as the presidential election year creeps closer."
Last time I looked out the window I didn't see any pigs at altitude, so I'm not holding my breath on that one.
To be serious for a moment, though, the labels "liberal" and "conservative" are so broad that I would be quite surprised if we saw any sort of overall consistency in the camps. Personal beliefs and political convictions are far more nuanced than broad labels.
(Yes, I know: that doesn't really help at all.)