Reflections, Reflections

It makes you feel really out of the swing of things when it is on Nov 7th the first time you even hear this RBC label.

From Classical Values - Eric

Realistic?

Slightly more than half of the citizens of this country simply do not care about what those of us in the "reality-based community" say or believe about anything.

-- Eric Alterman

Only slightly more than half? How many Americans have ever heard the expression "reality-based community" -- much less know what it means? I'd say the figure is considerably more than half.

Might even be 90%.....

Regular readers know how much I loathe labels, slogans and code-language. Perfectly good words are borrowed by various sorts of ideologues (left and right), with the result being that it's tougher and tougher to use once-ordinary words. "Family" is a perfect example which I have discussed before. A couple of years ago, some people started using the word "bright." "Choice" is another one. (Don't get me started on the word "values......") When this happens, my only resort is to tear out my hair (which is thinning, so I'd rather not), or complain to anyone who'll listen.

The latest example of this phraseology ("REALITY BASED COMMUNITY") abounds in leftish circles of the blogosphere, and it involves the use of the word "reality" to denote opposition to Bush, opposition to the war in Iraq, and opposition to religious influences on policy making.

and some of the best comments:

I reckon that "reality-based community" is meant to be the antonym of "faith-based community", Bush having introduced some various initiatives regarding the former. Although the connection to the argument about who defines reality is apposite as well.
posted by: Sean Stickle
----------------------------------------------------------

Actually, it's just another collection of phonemes that mean "We're right and everyone else is wrong and stupid."

It's a sentiment as old as history.
posted by: Ian Wood
--------------------------------------------------------------
Aren't these the same people who used to assert that reality is a crutch for people who can't face drugs?
posted by: triticale
--------------------------------------------------------------
Ironic that the "reality-based community" has chosen a sterotype (the moronic, hypocritical, bigot) to describe those with whom they disagree. This, of course, allows the RBC to create their own reality - one in which there are no good-faith disputes over policy or culture - and insolate their beliefs from any debate or empirical examination.

The RBC have already decided that anti-gay bigotry cost them this election. This will become the "Bush stole Florida" meme of 2004 - no matter how much evidence contradicts this "reality", 4 years from now it will still be gospel for those who believe themselves to be influenced only by their superior understanding of the real world.
posted by: Daniel
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Alessandra-->> This comment by Daniel that the RBC crowd does not allow for discussion or examination is particularly acute in the universities. This is where most of the worst harm is done. Media is second.

For example, pro-homosexuals have equated anti-homosexuals with haters. This maligning trick has seeped in popular culture so much so, that we see anti-homosexuals and/or anti-gay marriage supporters having to state that they are not full of hate. As if they ever were.

This is exactly the same as equating people who are anti-pedophilia, anti-prostitution, anti-SM as full of hate. A bigoted and cheap tactic to malign people who have opposing viewpoints with some ad hominen attack label.

Fortunately, it seems slowly but surely many Americans are catching on that the slimy "label your viewpoint opponent as full of hate" tactic is nothing but the sign of a bigot incapable of discussion.