roachboy

i understand the choice (of stacy as the guy to be tracked through this process) and the function it was to serve for the film--both are obvious. what i wonder about--and what i guess i tried to frame as a question in a kind of inept way above--is his representativeness...is he representative or not? is the problem with saying that he is that the outcome is kind of unflattering?

either way, clearly there is a dispositional-level "politics" that would prefer to see him as typical.

second point: i am not interested in questions of personality when i try to pose questions about the administration's ideology--i am interested in the ideology itself, the structures of argument particular to it and their effects. i do not find the assumption that conservative ideology appeals to stupid people interesting or useful or even correct--what i think is much more interesting is think about the extent to which investing in that ideology causes you--or anyone--to exlcude types of information and privelge others.

the more general point is a reaction to what i have been see in repeatedly in threads here over the past week or so on the question of "terrorism"---the opposition between support for the administration's policies on "terror" and questions of context/explanation.

i should have posed it in a less inflammatory manner--mea culpa.

but there are much more interesting questions to be considered across the above than that of whether you like supersize me or not--personally, i found the film obvious and not terribly interesting--eric schlosser's fast food nation was much more damaging than was supersize me. besides, supersize me is not exactly the issue here, is it?

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite