Sometimes That's The Way Things Are!
A brief tangent off of the post about David Irving below. I describe myself in it as a "free speech absolutist," and it occured to me that I wanted to think a bit about blood and thunder politics, because I indulge in it quite a bit - probably more than some of my friends would like.
In the unlikely event that anyone I don't know is reading this, I'm a fairly left-wing guy with more conservative (for Canada) friends than I would imagine is the norm for fairly left-wing guys. This is especially true when I consider my reputation among said circle of friends as an intemperate hothead, at least in argument. The title of this goofy blog is an in-joke, in addition to being a pun - I often don't see things in said shades of grey.
And sure, I've no doubt that on some issues the truth does lie in the middle between my clearly correct position and the incorrect one of the conservatives or moderates or defenders of putting Kris Draper on the Canadian Olympic hockey team, depending on the discussion. But other times I'm equally sure that what some people see as intemperance is simply calling it correctly. George Bush is in the conversation, as we say, about the worst President in US history. Free speech should be absolute, barring specific threats to people's lives. Kris Draper has no business being listed on what is ostensibly the best hockey roster possible of Canadian players. The New York Yankees are pure, unadulterated evil (and the Boston Red Sox are only slightly better.) These are all, of course, debatable opinions, but I doubt you're going to budge me an iota from any of them, and that's because I believe that they're right.
Because ultimately, while some debates are unresolvable, there is a right answer, whether I have it or not. It might not be one we can find or agree on, and it may wind up buried in history or under the weight of millions of Yankee-hat-wearing zombies. But it's there, and it isn't "shrill" to say that you think you have it.
Or that's what I think, anyway. Or is that too absolute?
In the unlikely event that anyone I don't know is reading this, I'm a fairly left-wing guy with more conservative (for Canada) friends than I would imagine is the norm for fairly left-wing guys. This is especially true when I consider my reputation among said circle of friends as an intemperate hothead, at least in argument. The title of this goofy blog is an in-joke, in addition to being a pun - I often don't see things in said shades of grey.
And sure, I've no doubt that on some issues the truth does lie in the middle between my clearly correct position and the incorrect one of the conservatives or moderates or defenders of putting Kris Draper on the Canadian Olympic hockey team, depending on the discussion. But other times I'm equally sure that what some people see as intemperance is simply calling it correctly. George Bush is in the conversation, as we say, about the worst President in US history. Free speech should be absolute, barring specific threats to people's lives. Kris Draper has no business being listed on what is ostensibly the best hockey roster possible of Canadian players. The New York Yankees are pure, unadulterated evil (and the Boston Red Sox are only slightly better.) These are all, of course, debatable opinions, but I doubt you're going to budge me an iota from any of them, and that's because I believe that they're right.
Because ultimately, while some debates are unresolvable, there is a right answer, whether I have it or not. It might not be one we can find or agree on, and it may wind up buried in history or under the weight of millions of Yankee-hat-wearing zombies. But it's there, and it isn't "shrill" to say that you think you have it.
Or that's what I think, anyway. Or is that too absolute?
posted by Ian Gray | 8:47 p.m.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home