Not Necessarily a News Flash: Beware of Archdruids

greer I find myself embarrassed to say that, until today, I had been taking the Personage at left quite seriously, despite His navel-gazing view of politics.

Then, today, the Archdruid — I shit you not, that’s what He calls Himself — published this amazingly ignorant expression of His unreconstructed (one wants to say uninformed) conventionality, the thesis of which is that We, All the American People, got together and chose to remain stupid “30 years ago.”  Why “30 years ago?”  Either His Archness greatly overrates Jimmy Carter and/or that’s when His Archness first started thinking about things (and, hence, We The People missed our first chance to heed His Archness’s commands).

In trying to get Him to debate this preposterous, baseless claim on His Archness’s Holy Website, I found out the answer is good luck to you.  His Archness not only screens all comments, but refrains from posting those that dig a little too close to where he keeps His unexamined suburban white kid’s socio-political worldview buried.  This, despite talking at length about the crucial value of dissensus.

I’ve always said, scratch a hippie, find a Republican.  Take a look at the Archness’s post above, and see if you can disagree.  Sad, because He isn’t stupid about ecology.

News flash to His Archness:  Social reality is almost as powerful as Natural reality.  Knowing the latter is not a hall pass to skip knowledge of the former.

And note also that His Archness frames His own political and historical conventionality as an antidote to nihilism!

6 Replies to “Not Necessarily a News Flash: Beware of Archdruids”

  1. He has a lot of interesting points and practical information to share. He is also comfortable operating outside of the conventional range of opinion. That he is not perfect, or that every belief and opinion he holds is not solidly supported by all the evidence, or that he has sometimes bewilderingly simplified and misguided opinions about how and who in a society makes choices, makes him no different than the rest of us. Or most of us.

    I am not disagreeing with what you write, I feel like I’ve noticed some of the same maddeningly simplistic and condescending remarks, but there is usually something worth reading in his writing despite the flaws.

    I don’t understand how he could blame Americans for the dumb energy choices of thirty years ago either that elites both made and profited from, everyone knows its the fault of the Mexicans.

  2. Your posts have been entertaining to read from September 2007 on to today. I’m not sure why you believe that John’s site is holy but I suppose we each have to adhere to faith of our own. Thank you for expressing your interesting thoughts.

  3. Robert, I just find it strange that a supposed believer in dissensus won’t engage in it, and also screens incoming comments. I’ll admit that the above post is too harsh and hyperbolic. But this isn’t a game, either. I find JMG’s political analysis to be close to denialist, and quite akin to those who argue that we have no ecological crisis on the basis of refusing to think about the laws of nature. America has no elite and no power structure? Wow!

  4. And, by the way, there’s no way JMG has read Karl Marx, despite his claims to the contrary. There are many problems with Marx, but “Manicheanism” is just not one of them. Anybody who’s looked would never say that, and JMG is too sharp a critic to say it himself, if he knew Marx at all. The truth is, he’s never bothered, and it shows.

    I appreciate that JMG dislikes later Marxist writers’ tendency to to end their works with “socialism or barbarism” calls. Those aren’t very helpful. But being annoyed by that is hardly a substitute for due diligence on the part of a major opinion leader.

  5. Can’t stand the fool. I’ve tried several times in the past to make comments about his misinterpretation/misunderstanding of Marx and Socialism but they’ve never made it through the censor. Sadly, his barely warmed up exam notes on Schumacher – or whoever he happens to have read in the previous 3 months – is what passes for radical engagement in the environmental world. And dicking around dressed as an extra from The Ten Commandments hardly adds to his appeal.

  6. Yeah, it’s pretty interesting that a thinker who is all about knowing ecological sequences seems so rockheaded about social sequences, not to mention the need to sustain contacts in order to be taken seriously. Personally, I don’t trust people who claim to be activists but still allow their personal sense of sartorial statement-making to give other people reasons to stop listening.

    But, clearly, Greer dropped out of society a long time ago, and isn’t willing to consider whether that was a mistake, or even a live topic. He knows what He knows, and feels it’s enough.

Comments are closed.