Skip to main content

Can I Tell You About the School of Fuckit?

Despite my attempt to apply (negligible) pressure to my writing, I have found that the expectation that I publish regularly is not the same as expecting quality writing. Or that I follow my plans as I sit to write. I have been planning to write the same piece for weeks now, but continuously find something that seems more "current"; I've got reasons. This has been theoretically annoying, but surprisingly gratifying in practice. The last piece I wrote about my mother was the third most read piece on my blog within two days. I'm always touched by the opportunity to share my love for my mother with the world. I realize that I write better with some time pressure, and waiting until the day I'm supposed to post to write adds that. It also makes it easier to rely on my ad hoc make the road by walking style of writing: is it intellectual laziness or an invocation to my favorite muse? I wrap myself in my faith at her feet. That I continue to have questions about my approach to this blog suggests that I need to make changes to my approach to this blog.

I have a number of things that I think about frequently: the field of education, politics, music, where did all the time go, am I going to die soon. I'm often distracted by random questions that I can explore alone but which might be better served as a public exercise about which I'm more deliberate. I have not been writing with any audience in mind. It might be interesting to start writing with a specific audience in mind, even if the intended audience changes with each writing. For example, does anyone still think Russia is a significant reason for Trump being president? I'm genuinely curious. Full disclosure: I've always thought it was bullshit and have been waiting for it to be widely dismissed. I thought it might be interesting to lay out the arguments for and against the impact of the "interference" I gathered a bunch of sources, and decided I really just don't care. It's stupid. When I returned to this blog I wrote several posts related to the left winning again focused essentially on policy that centered the needs of the Democrats' core constituencies. Instead of focusing on the needs of the people they'd like to have vote for them they focused on blaming Russia, calling Trump an existential threat, and then essentially acquiescing to his every demand. There's a reason why a generic Dem polls within the margin of error for a generic Republican in the midterm of a senile incompetent's administration: they're focused on the wrong constituents. I'm bored by the Russia story because it's a distraction from the party's desire to change nothing after their huge predicted loss. It's boring because nothing's changed.

I think this post came into being because I've been thinking about a message I received from a FB friend that I've not responded to:
Brother. How do you remain positive? I read your posts regularly and deeply respect your knowledge and universal concern for others. I also read you posts and see tenderness and optimism in them. You and I are similar with regard to the former, but...I am in a dish of emotional and spiritual exhaustion. You strength is amazing to me.
 I've been trying to figure out why I've been sort of "caught up" in this nice message, finding it difficult to give a simple response or ignore it. I think it's finally come to me. I'm not positive or particularly optimistic. I'd started thinking of myself as cynical again, leading to me focusing on trying to say 'yes' more frequently. But I'm not cynical. I'm a realist. I'm relatively well informed across a number of topics. I like data. I think it's more likely that I will be killed by a combination of shitty infrastructure and a careless driver not because I'm paranoid but just due to observation of bike paths, street quality, and traffic patterns in Boston. I avoided the field of education for 20 years because the effects of outside "cooks" and privatization were predictable. I decided to become a teacher because: fuck it. That's essentially my life philosophy. We are doomed, I may die on my bike ride to school tomorrow, but what else are we supposed to do? Fuck it. It's worthwhile to hold onto the simultaneous truths that the world is dangerous and unquestionably beautiful. As I write this I'm sitting on my porch, the sun descending, the air almost uncomfortably chill. At the same time I'm angry about a list of things that is not long but is very precise. All I can do right now is smile, my anger alone won't change those things, it's these moments where I can't help but smile that gives the distance, strength, and inspiration to address those issues. I'm going to push myself to write in detail about the many moments that have required me to employ the teachings of the great philosopher Fuckit; of my two pieces per month one will address a topic which requires the use of sources and some degree of planning.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Making the White Supremacist Argument in Blackface

What are the stakes that people imagine to be bound up with demonstrating that capitalism in this country emerged from slavery and racism, which are treated as two different labels for the same pathology? Ultimately, it's a race reductionist argument. What the Afro-pessimist types or black nationalist types get out of it is an insistence that we can't ever talk about anything except race. And that's partly because talking about race is the things they have to sell. Adolph Reed Jr. If it's not clear already, it's worth thinking about the ways in which the history revision of the 1619 Project is less about understanding history than it is using history to justify a specific approach to defining and dealing with racism in the present. It serves the same purpose as all of the moral idealism pretending to represent justice-- identity politics, intersectionality, reparations-- that exist in the discourse to deter economic redistribution generally, and specifical

Anti-racism - Class = Status Quo: The Neoliberal Argument Against Coalition

I was approached a few months ago around the idea of collaborating to make the progressive case for reparations. I've said before that while the idea of reparations is morally appealing I don't believe in them as an immediate political project. It's not clear to me that it's possible to build a coalition around a reparative justice focused on just 13% of the population. Encouraged by a recent Twitter conversation that included economists Sandy Darrity and Darrick Hamilton where they suggested that saying reparations will never happen is cynical I've begun trying to think of them as an eventuality and lay out the steps to reaching them. Doing this has made clear that our understanding of reparations as a form of compensation to the descendants of the enslaved is not the reparative justice that we think it to be. If we were living with the kind of understanding of justice that made reparations possible we would not be a nation where war, healthcare, education, and cr

Is Cynicism More Disqualifying Than Ignorance?

I was somewhat reluctant at the time to ascribe any specific intent to Elizabeth Warren's DNA stunt, just focusing on what it said about her political instincts. In retrospect, because of subsequent choices, I see it as craven cynicism. I get that, "I have a plan for that!" is supposed to be her new brand, but obviously, a working plan isn't a central part of that. Her brand should actually be "Pandering Cynic". I now find myself wondering if even she thinks the policy she offers will do what she says it's intended to do. I've been saying in my head that I feel irrational anger towards her, but it's actually quite rational and specific. My posting schedule has been off because I've been playing with the idea of submitting pieces for publication. I've been thinking a lot about how we talk about disparities and how the conversation is used as a cudgel against universal policy. The closest to a good faith version of this argument is