DISQUS

Rob · 5 years ago

I chose to start running again because I don't want to be fat.

Hmm. This sounds vaguely like "false-consciousness" to me, Will. I say: you chose to start running again because you're doing it for the nookie !

Will Wilkinson · 5 years ago

If nookie isn't an authentic, organically arising desire, then I don't know what is.

Rob · 5 years ago

Dude -- what the hell are you doing at 4:10 in the frickin' morning. Hmm? :0

Luka Yovetich · 5 years ago

Nice post! I am just very recently (this week I suppose) going a bit crazy over the fact that the academics and actor-types that I run with think it's SO important that Bush gets ousted. I think it's fine to want Kerry to win (or Bush) but I just don't get the whole I'm-gonna-move-out-of-the-country-if-Bush-wins attitude that some people seem to have.

It drives me nuts.

Dan · 5 years ago

Will, most people think that there are two ways to make an "authentic" choice, free of false-consciousness:

- By choosing what is in your authentic interest
- By knowingly choosing to do something that will promote others' authentic interests

Now, if you're fairly well off, living a fairly comfortable life, then it's probably true that your life is largely unaffected by which party is in power. But a lot of people's lives are affected. For millions of people, which party has power could mean the difference between having health care or not, or between making just enough money to get by or making a little bit more, or between having the right to get married or not. For over a hundred thousand people, it has meant going overseas to fight a war in Iraq, for thousands of those it has meant serious injury, and for hundreds of them, death. It could make a difference in the rights, liberties, and prosperity of millions of people in the Middle East. I could go on.

Some people sincerely care about issues like these and vote based on what they value and what they believe the parties will do, even though these issues only have a minor, tangential effect on their self-interest. Others are tricked by rhetoric & advertising. And there's a continuum between the two.

Politics may be more sensitive to false-consciousness-inducing salesmanship than commerce because the effects of politics are less clear and tangible. You can feel whether your shoes are comfortable, but it's hard to tell whether Iraq really is becoming a democracy, or what Saddam would have done if we hadn't taken him out, or what impact the changes in Iraq will have on the safety of the US.

Gene · 5 years ago

The toothpaste analogy worked particularly well for me, given that the last time I voted, in 2000, in Virginia, they gave everyone a little "I Voted!" sticker--exactly like they used to give me at my dentist's as a little kid when I didn't have any cavities. Fucking hell.

Will Wilkinson · 5 years ago

Dan, I really don't agree that the party in power makes as much difference as you seem to think. There are differences upon which one might base an authentic choice (ala whitening action vs. cavity protection), but most of it really is just rhetoric, positioning, marketing, etc. Now, I feel particularly strongly about the issues surrounding equal legal rights for gays, and I think party affiliation makes a real difference there. But I just don't believe that the democrats, say, have any intention or ability to make people better off financially, or improve health care. I know what they say, but it's pretty naive to just believe it. Anyway, if I made a list of D dream policy and R dream policy, the things I consider bad on one list would more or less cancel everything good on the other. There are things the Rs do that I prefer over the Ds, and vice versa, but taken as a whole, it's a Hobson's choice. I think that the fact that people are unable to see how awful the choice really is, and that they truly buy the story fed to them by the party to which they've developed some kind of contingent commitment, is the evidence for false consciousness. (Really, it's just fun to accuse people of false consciousness; I think I really would have enjoyed the intellectual game of Marxism.) About Iraq, I certainly don't see any material difference in Kerry, who approved of the war, voted for the Patriot Act, and can differentiate himself from Bush only by mouthing bromides about international cooperation. That said, you'll vote for Kerry, and you'll sleep perfectly well. So, whatever.

Alina · 5 years ago

The false consciousness is PRECISELY the problem Will. It is why democracy, or the illusion of choice, is failing to create an engaged political citizenry. Would parliamentary democracy be more effective? Probably not-- but at least it would be less cynical and stylistically stupefying. "What Party are you in?" should be "What game are you playing? And what bets are you hedging?".

Joanna · 5 years ago

Great post, Will. I especially love the "Deibold taps" paragraph.
I'm not particularly interested in the false consciousness argument, but I was laugh-out-loud glad that Gene made the astute sticker connection between dentistry and voting.
Here's my proposal for election day--let's all get our teeth cleaned, give a pint of blood, and vote for whomever we believe will wreak the least havoc on our lives. Then we'll have THREE stickers and sense of hygenic, charitable, and civic satisfaction. It doesn't get any better than that.

Joanna · 5 years ago

Rob seems to have a consistent curiousity about what contributes to Will's sex life. Blogging, running...
Are you trying to crack his particular formula or do you have a general tendency to (jokingly?) attribute all motivations to those of the sexual nature?

Rob · 5 years ago

Joanna -- it's quite the latter.

Rob · 5 years ago

Joanna--also, nothing interests me more in life than sex, working-out, and political philosophy.

Dan · 5 years ago

Will,

I believe that Dems are more likely to do things like increasing the EITC and minimum wage, making the tax system more progressive, and creating policies that decrease the number of people without healthcare. I think that both history and the current proposals of the parties support my position (on the whole).

I also firmly believe that Kerry (or Gore) would not have declared war on Iraq had he been President. Certainly, the position that Kerry took on the war as a Senator is open to criticism, but I find it hard to believe that he would have chosen to fight that war if he were setting the agenda instead of just voting yes or no on it.

I don't think that a Kerry presidency will whiten my teeth or help me sleep, but I think that it will have a significant benefit for the American populace (and many people outside America), especially compared with another Bush term.

Joanna · 5 years ago

Rob-
That's what I figured. But in case you are curious, I'll certainly vouch for the effectiveness of Will's strategy.

Peter James Bond · 5 years ago

Will isn't suffering from "false consciousness" as much as a "false sortie." I believe Derrida came up with the latter term to describe someone who thought they could deconstruct their way out of the overdetermined parameters of perception - which can't be done. Sorry to quote a French guy, I know that's anathema to many.

Libertarians have an orthodoxy too. For example, why not support a party (either D or R) that can make progress on certain issues than support a party that has never, and probably will never, win a major election? Because the Libertarian orthodoxy values independence and ideological purity and states that the two parties are nearly identical. The opinions you stated in your post could be classified as knee-jerk libertarian just as much as a MoveOn member's could be called knee-jerk liberal. Your preferences are neither "organic" nor from the "angels." Sorry.