» Most Politics Are “Boring As Fuck”
I went to a university where 60s Retro meant staging protests against banal evil (university administrators are a convenient branch of The Man). This essay argues that such politics are irrelevant. What it doesn’t address explicitly is that mainstream politics is just as irrelevant, causing voter apathy.
Since environmentalism is the new civil rights, I wonder to what extent these criticisms and recommendations are relevant? Most fanatic environmentalists I know practise eco-asceticism (veganism is the new flogging), which is certainly lacking in joy* and excitement. But I would charge that environmentalism is too relevant to our everyday experience of life: demanding we forgo shiny dishes while big industry gets away with carbon credits that aren’t.
* The requirement for joy makes me think the essay is a manifesto for postmodern politics.
I am unimpressed with the essay.
It does seem postmodernist. Apparently the solution to the problem is to redefine the word politics.
It also seems self-contradictory. It states several times that the reason politics are so boring to most people is that politics have become an elitist academic game that is not relevant to everyday life. e.g. It is bad that we “make politics look … like a miserable, self-referential, pointless middle class/bohemian game”. But it also states that we should try to make politics interesting by not selling it as boring obligations, but as “an exciting game that is worthwhile for its own sake.” So apparently a self-referential and pointless game is OK for politics, as long as it’s “fun”.
In general, in the essay’s ideas about what makes politics boring and what can make politics interesting, it talks a lot about elitist games and everyday concerns, obligations and fulfillment, trying to make it sound like there is some substance to the points (more evidence that it is post-modernist?) but basically the points boil down to: “X is boring politics, but X + fun is fun politics.” Yes, fun is fun – thanks for the insight.
Don
3 May 07 at 3:33 pm
Now after attempting to deconstruct our post-modernist, post-Marxist essay, I turn to Jared’s post.
Yes, I think that the points of the essay generally apply to the hard-core environmentalist movement (by which I mean those who would presumably spend time debating useless points in an obscure environmentalist newsletter, or change their name to Fluffy Bunny and live in a tree, or become a vegan, or something equally extreme.) Those points being: don’t waste your time doing those types of things or focusing on simply making people feel guilty.
And I think that the essay’s points about making the movement seem “fun” is as useless for environmentalism as for post-Marxism.
So what can people do to make a bigger difference and actually spread your message? I don’t know – that is a challenge, and one that I don’t know the answer to, and that the essay doesn’t seem to address adequately.
As for mainstream politics being boring, I’m not sure if that is a bad thing. I’m thinking of using simple, rallying, and (apparently to most people) exciting issues like flag-burning and gay marriage in the States to drum up support before an election.
Don
3 May 07 at 3:44 pm
Via BB, a counterexample:
Jack
3 May 07 at 5:45 pm
Re: Jared’s Uni. When I was at UVic there was a protest against a protest against a march. How you ask?
Gay pride march -> Straight pride protest -> Anti-straight pride protest.
One wonders when (if?) the marchers/protesters/anti-protesters actually got around to graduating.
Jack
3 May 07 at 6:04 pm
Like most things in our society, it appears that politics is now supposed to be a leisure activity? Pure entertainment?
Join us in making the “revolution” a game; a game played for the highest stakes of all, but a joyous, carefree game nonetheless!
Jack
3 May 07 at 6:24 pm