Two Faces of American Maleness

I got emails from the two extremes of the ideological spectrum this morning, one from Free Market Carnivore, the other from Yes! magazine.  Despite their violent differences, there are actually quite a few commonalities:  suspicion of the powers that be, suspicion of the stimulus plan, and the most egregious mis-use of words and concepts so as to overpower their straw-man opponent.  Makes me want to laugh and cry. 

Here's the carnivore quoting from Michael Reagan's book on Reagan versus Keynes:

"The fundamental assumption of Keynesianism - the belief that government drives the economy - defies logic. All wealth is created in the private sector and the government can only tax or borrow that wealth out of the private sector and shuffle it around," he said. In conditions like those around the corner, the government will be competing with the private sector for money.

Of course, that belief that government should run the economy fits in with the left's big government theory. If they convince people that the government should run the economy, then it is easier to explain to them that the government needs more money to do more for them, that tax cuts are a "cost" to the government, that reallocation of the wealth of society should be "fairly" handled by the government and that the levers of regulatory power should be in the hands of the government to make sure no one gets out of line.

Heres the liberal perspective on male psychic mutilation under consumer capitalism:

As in the workplace and war, men’s bodies are also exploited in the marketplace. It is here that powerlessness in the sphere of production is compensated for symbolically. Any consumer product sold as a symbol of manhood can function in this way. Many such products are innocuous; some are not. Millions of men have died in the last 50 years, yielding many millions of dollars of profit, by seeking manhood in a pack of Marlboros.

Teaching males to seek feelings of worth through displays of power, toughness, and competitiveness turns male bodies into readily exploitable generators of profit. The costs to all but the tiny few who appropriate these profits are enormous: ruined bodies and minds, premature death, perpetual war, depression and drug use, interpersonal violence, and the abuse of women and others who are not men in good standing.

What the two also share is the vitality of the argument.  That is a good thing, not something that we should bemoan.   I love peace and harmony more than most, but argument is a vital human pleasure.  If only we would listen to each other, rather than trying to drown each other out.