|
next morning:
on "bushworld":
i make a distinction between conservatism as a discursive or political construct and individual people who might happen to be conservative. i am interested in a particular type (or series of types) of arguments about the world that are shaped by the main conservative media--when i talk about conservatives, in the main i am talking about that. bushworld is the place these arguments make for those to see the world through them. i see it as a parallel universe almost, a self-enclosing, self-confirming space. i assume that folk can buy into bushworld differentially, but find that there are more consistencies than differences across the positions outlined by folk who identify themselves as conservative, and that these consistencies can be routed through this broader discursive space, more often than not. whence bushworld.
the terms--which are just a shorthand that has the advantage of being polemical--sometimes generate seperate problems, which, when they arise, result in posts like this.
but---sadly, for me at least-----it seems that the designations are more accurate than not.
there are folk with whom the global shorthand i use matters much less in conversation---irate, for example in this thread--but there are quite a few other folk whose positions i have come to see as nuanced within a general conservative frame of reference---but i do switch in and out of the shorthand, and so leave the points you made, lebel, as openings. and with that the possibility of the occasional qualifying post.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear
it make you sick.
-kamau brathwaite
|