Shoot the fuck and walk away

Here is a piece from George Carlin's last show: It's all bullshit. I created subtitles of course, because the primary reason I put it up on the internet is because I wanna share my favorite comedians with other French people. Who otherwise would never hear about them.

Here it is.

I would like to simply talk about the first part of Carlin's rants: pride. I hesitated to do that, because I'm always unsure whether Carlin is serious about the things he says on his shows. Is this simply comedy material or is this serious ? He certainly showed he was able to use logic. But then, how much did he know and how much did he fake not knowing, in order to make us laugh ?

I still want to talk about this one, because it's a position I held for a long time, at least until recently. Why would you be proud of being American, or Italian, or Irish ? As Carlin says, being Irish isn't a skill. It is of course true and this is what I've been thinking to myself for years.

But then, he also mentions Black and Puerto-Rican pride. And now, if no one sees a pattern emerge, when you bring up the Italians, the Irish, the Blacks and the Puerto-Ricans... Well what the hell are you doing in America ? I'm the one who sees the pattern and you don't ! Come on ! Switch places with me !

This should be obvious to everyone, that each of these groups has been discriminated against, in its time. And is there not a gay pride as well ? Aren't gays the most reviled group in history ? I think they are.

And this is how I saw through Carlin's unability to understand ethnic or national pride. Because I recently read an article by Arthur Silber, about how Whites could never understand Blacks or Gays. Arthur had favorably mentioned an essay by Madeline Moore, where she said that all Whites were racist from the moment they were born. Another blogger took notice and destroyed that statement with cold logic. But Arthur had this to say:

I acknowledge that, viewed in isolation, Moore uses the term "racist" imprecisely and inaccurately in the excerpt above; without grasping the entire context in which Moore makes the statements that elicit Larry's anger, those statements are wrong -- even obviously wrong, as Larry says repeatedly.

But the surrounding context ought to be painfully obvious: Moore is discussing a society and a culture which are founded on, organized around and which embody white, straight male privilege across the board, and in virtually every aspect and particular. That critical, broader context must inform how one interprets Moore's narrower statements. Instead, Larry takes a great deal of time and attention to make a very delimited philosophic point which is (as he himself argues) painfully obvious to anyone with half a brain, while the much more complex and infinitely more significant cultural realities entirely elude him. As a result, Larry's argument is, to use his own word, "trivial" given his avoidance of the overriding political, social and cultural dynamics in play.

And so you see, even though the national and ethnic pride, taken alone, do not make any kind of sense, when you consider the 'broader context' they take on a completely new meaning: it was a way for those groups to fight against discrimination. When someone tries to deny your rights, what they really say is "You're not one of us, you're inferior, you should be ashamed."

There are two options when you're confronted with this: either you lie low and live with what you've got, or you resist, and that comes in the form of 'pride'. "I'm not inferior, and I'll never be ashamed. In fact, I'm at least as worthy as you, if not more. I'm proud of what I am."

This gets homophobes annoyed at gay pride. "You would think they could be quiet. But no, they have to shove it in your face." Well, maybe they can't be quiet. Maybe the only way to resist discrimination is to be exuberant.

One last quote from a very important essay by Arthur and I'm out:

Let me tell you something: unless you've been there, you do not know what it's like. You just don't. And don't tell me you do. Yes, you can understand it, and you can offer genuine and meaningful sympathy. But you don't know what it's like to feel that, and to experience that to the very core of your being -- to realize that no matter what you do, no matter how good you are, no matter how hard you work, some people just won't give a damn. And they won't give you a chance -- when they would give the same chance, and much more, to someone who wasn't gay, or who wasn't a woman, or who wasn't black, and who deserved it much less than you did.

Comments

A quick disclaimer

I want to add that I didn't expect this post to come up like this. I thought this would appear as an aside, for those who would by any chance be interested in stuff other members of the community would come up with.

I never thought this was important enough to have it appear at the forefront of the site. And I certainly don't consider myself so important a writer that my posts should appear next to WP's, as if they were equal in relevance.

I emailed him that he could delete it anytime he wants.

admin's picture

no big deal

This is the community site, WP's got his blog and this site provides a space for comments about his blogs but it's certainly not limited to that.
If you want things to appear less prominently I'd suggest making a forum topic or just comment on the latest thread.
I did have second thoughts about profanity in the title, but hey, it doesn't bother me so hopefully it won't bother anyone else too much. If anyone has a different opinion I'm willing to listen.

-NJT

isms

Patriotism is a manifestation of the Stockholm Syndrome.
We all are a minority of one.
The social and cultural differences between us may be a blessing, allowing us to experience new things in life.
These "differences" may also be used to manipulate our actions toward goals which are not a blessing.
The creation of nationality, race, religious factions, etc. has been used by the fear mongers to separate and control societies.
In the end, we are all the same mud-walking-around.

Discrimination

Auther Silber is right. Unless you have experienced discrimination, you don't understand it. All forms of discrimination from torture through to social exclusion sicken the soul and I have experienced both.
Two opposite responses are retribution leading in extreme to murder and war and/or, on the other hand, self abuse such as drugs or simply adopting the message through to suicide.
Both are violent reactions and I am yet to find a better response (not that I find violence a solution, I hasten to add). I would welcome comments.

I thought it was a great post

I thought it was a great post -- no need for a disclaimer. I wouldn't consider deleting it or moving it or anything ... I like it right where it is.

As for subject matter, feel free: This site is for all of us ... Don't wait for me to introduce a topic: I could never find enough time to write about all the topics I find interesting, so please fill in any gaps you want to fill -- not just Matthieu but everybody.

And the profanity in the title is perfect, isn't it?. I mean, what are we gonna do, censor George Carlin? LOL!!

Thanks, Matthieu.

---

Thanks. That was my first name, for those who might wonder who Matthieu is.

Arthur Silber is right. Unless you have experienced discrimination, you don't understand it. All forms of discrimination from torture through to social exclusion sicken the soul and I have experienced both.
Two opposite responses are retribution leading in extreme to murder and war and/or, on the other hand, self abuse such as drugs or simply adopting the message through to suicide.
Both are violent reactions and I have yet to find a better response (not that I find violence a solution, I hasten to add). I would welcome comments.

Depends on what you mean by 'better' response. You mean, a reaction that will lead to the end of discrimination, faster/more effectively than the violent reactions you described ? Or do you mean, these reactions you described are the only ones, and unfortunately they're bloody ?

Certainly, everyone remembers the Civil Rights movement and MLK. Wasn't that a way, different from self-abuse and retribution ?

In any case that's a huge subject there. It is difficult to say anything.

Better response

I should add, Littehorn, that I agree that your writing is very worthwhile. It certainly struck a chord and prompted a response from me.
I was thinking in the personal sense rather than the societal sense i.e. how can I better respond to discrimination/exploitation (rather than what others should do)? How can I deal with it that is constructive for me and then others?

Yes, big question. It seems to me (and Daniel Quinn whom I got his idea from!) change isn't going to come from appeals to people to be better than they are. Exploitation is institutionalised in this society and we are all sitting ducks and it isn't going to change until the ducks, individually, start shooting back. But how to do that without using the weapons of the exploiters and just exacerbating the madness?

Agreed

It seems to me (and Daniel Quinn whom I got his idea from!) change isn't going to come from appeals to people to be better than they are. Exploitation is institutionalised in this society and we are all sitting ducks and it isn't going to change until the ducks, individually, start shooting back. But how to do that without using the weapons of the exploiters and just exacerbating the madness?
I certainly don't subscribe to the conservative/liberal solution of pulling yourself up by your own bootstraps. I don't think anyone here does.

So you meant a better method to end discrimination...I really don't know. I haven't given it a lot of thought.

For now, I'll note that you surreptitiously replaced discrimination with exploitation, and while discrimination is made possible by exploitation, the two are not considered the same way by most people. Maybe you know of Louis Proyect's blog ? I am not a Marxist myself, but he said something the other day that seems appropriate considering what I just said:
The issue of our day is wage slavery just as chattel slavery was in the 1840s and 50s. Of course, it is a lot harder to focus on wage slavery since most Americans, including those in thrall, accept it as normal.

These days, to even talk about exploiters is a feat.

Of Ducks and Fish

Thanks for your thoughtful responses, Littlehorn. Exploitation is a broader term and I suppose a bigger question yet. This is a limited space and I have had limited time to frame the question well enough.

"Of course, it is a lot harder to focus on wage slavery since most Americans, including those in thrall, accept it as normal."

Exactly. Or how do you explain something to someone whose livelyhood (or psychological stability, they think) depends on them not understanding it?
Or how does a fish become aware of the water it swims in? Hence the importance of providing a complete environment for the public; to script and control the Opposition as well as the Ruling faction. Which is what WP has written very well about in his latest post on Musharraf.

I know I'm ranging all over the place. What can I say except I think there is a perception or question behind all these issues. I wish I had the elloquence of WP or Arthur Silber.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.