David Mamet: Why I Am No Longer a 'Brain-Dead Liberal'

The Village Voice ^ | 03/11/08 | David Mamet

[Reaganesque]

And there's always this quote:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness...

[Billthedrill]

A wonderful dissertation, and thanks for posting. Horowitz's conversion story is compelling, as are the stories of Sidney Hook and George Orwell. The best of these is still, IMHO, Chambers's Witness. But Mamet puts it beautifully:

...we are not and never have been the villains that some of the world and some of our citizens make us out to be, but that we are a confection of normal (greedy, lustful, duplicitous, corrupt, inspired—in short, human) individuals living under a spectacularly effective compact called the Constitution, and lucky to get it.

Too lucky in a lot of cases because it's so taken for granted that it isn't properly defended by beneficiaries who have the conceit that they can improve on it. Such as:

The Constitution, written by men with some experience of actual government, assumes that the chief executive will work to be king, the Parliament will scheme to sell off the silverware, and the judiciary will consider itself Olympian and do everything it can to much improve (destroy) the work of the other two branches. So the Constitution pits them against each other, in the attempt not to achieve stasis, but rather to allow for the constant corrections necessary to prevent one branch from getting too much power for too long.

It's organized chaos. Properly confined it is very effective if not particularly efficient. And we really oughtn't be too surprised if legislators swamp us with laws, executives with direction, and judges with pontification. That is, after all, what we pay them to do. The real problem is that so many of all three have a tendency to forget who their employers really are.

[Red Boots]

The Constitution, written by men with some experience of actual government, assumes that the chief executive will work to be king, the Parliament will scheme to sell off the silverware, and the judiciary will consider itself Olympian and do everything it can to much improve (destroy) the work of the other two branches.

So the Constitution pits them against each other, in the attempt not to achieve stasis, but rather to allow for the constant corrections necessary to prevent one branch from getting too much power for too long.

Rather brilliant. For, in the abstract, we may envision an Olympian perfection of perfect beings in Washington doing the business of their employers, the people, but any of us who has ever been at a zoning meeting with our property at stake is aware of the urge to cut through all the pernicious bullshit and go straight to firearms.

These two paragraphs I thought worth repeating. An excellant article, thanks for posting.

[my_pointy_head_is_sharp]

Wordy and unreadable? It was very brief, and written in a conversational style. How much more simple could it get? Are you people not used to reading?

[Silly]

I love Mamet, always have. His book “True and False” is excellent. I started reading “Bambi vs. Godzillar” (about the film industry) but haven’t finished it.

[Ditter]

Yeah, written in a conversational style,like when you are having a conversation with yourself and your thoughts are whirling around in your head. Kinda like that.

[joe fonebone]

I love to read..the problem is not the content, but the writing style...it drifts in and out too many times, making it difficult to read...i agree with the content..

[Osage Orange]

I noted that also..........

FRegards,

[Old Student]

“However, this article reeks of HONESTY, which is why it’s much more important than arguing his individual points.”

True discernment on display for all to see.

The conversion from liberal to conservative is not done in a few moments, but it begins with a realization like this person told us. Nit-picking at the areas where he still holds a liberal view is a waste of time, and may chill his interest in making those changes.

[hershey]

David Mamet woke up to reality, and his article is well worth the read.

[Old Student]

“But in all seriousness, I’d never trust anybody who converts instaneously from “complete leftist” to conservative (or libertarian) all in one fell swoop.”

Mitt Romney comes to mind. Maybe not a perfect fit, but one that drew my attention, since we share a church.

[GOP_Party_Animal]

My prize, in a stunning example of irony, was a year's subscription to New York, which rag (apart from Mary Ann's "Competition") I considered an open running sore on the body of world literacy—this due to the presence in its pages of John Simon, whose stunning amalgam of superciliousness and savagery, over the years, was appreciated by that readership searching for an endorsement of proactive mediocrity.

Do you need another example?

[highlander_UW]

So apparently, the cure for the mental disorder called liberalism is.....RATIONAL THINKING.

[SatinDoll]

PING for later reading.

[bcsco]

It can be a painful thing, going from a deep-seated assumption that people are “basically good” to the realization that they’re not. It requires, as my husband would say, a complete “paradigm shift” that many aren’t self aware enough to contemplate, let alone master by incorporating it into their daily lives.

We Christians live it daily. As we say..."We all sin and fall short of the glory of God". It's part of our belief meme. For we recognize that without that absolute certainty, there would have been no reason for Christ's sacrifice on the Cross.

[huldah1776]

When we are young, we have not yet seen ourselves at our worst, so we judge others as we judge ourselves. After we fall from our own grace, we have to admit that we are all fallen. Old liberals will never confess to being fallen, and liberals always blame someone else. I have noticed though, that on News talk radio, the republicans are blaming everything on the dems. The republicans not taking action while in power, makes them just as guilty. I can’t imagine having that power, and I guess that is why God said the meek will inherit the earth.

[Wilhelm Tell]

Interesting article. There is a lot of truth about a tragic view of life vs. a utopian view of life. and how this makes people see things differently. Some people have noted that liberals compare America against a hypothetical utopia, thus they find America wanting and they condemn America in absolute terms for not being perfect. On the other hand, they view America’s enemies in an idealistic way that blots out almost all problems - the Soviet Union was the wave of the future and Stalin only made a few mistakes, communism will work when the right people are put in charge, Pol Pot was an agrarian reformer, the Islamic realm is a utopia of peace and tolerance, but unfortunately it is the extreme evil of the U.S. and Israel that causes Islamists to react in an extreme way, etc.

[fortunecookie]

Mamet from the Village Voice. Now a conservative. Color me stunned. Good read, thanks!

[Talisker]

“But in all seriousness, I’d never trust anybody who converts instaneously from “complete leftist” to conservative (or libertarian) all in one fell swoop. That kind of behavior borders on the insane. In my opinion, a sincere and sane person is always going to make a gradual political change.”

I agree in principle, Hawthorn, but in practice both processes can interact with each other - it happened to me. I was raised democrat, but researched political theory and history for a long time, and became more and more upset with the liberal hypocrisies I was coming to understand. But because of my social environment, I consistantly refused the step of openly detaching myself from liberalism.

So my actual change of mind was gradual, which as you point out tends to reflect real change. But it was suppressed. So on the surface “nothing” was happening. Then after years of this, I watched the Waco inferno, and that finally did it for me - the dam finally broke. I simply could not, even remotely, rationalize that horror with its liberal cover story, even though I knew much larger historical atrocities had occurred through collectivism. But Waco was here and now, in my country - in America. And it’s brazenly democrat-backed flames burned up all the denial I had remaining about any “differences” with the past.

So after that, I was “suddenly” conservative to the point of being openly against liberalism, with most of the arguments already well understood. That’s why I believe appearances can be deceiving in conversion situations. Long resistance to the often severe social consequences for the change can easily create the need for some sort of trigger to release things. For me it was Waco, for others it will be other things, but always something that just cannot be rationalized at long last.

Obviously, frauds will use this build-up-and-release process as a cover, too. So I’m not saying that it explains everything. But sometimes it does actually happen for real. And it’s not completely irrational either - collectivist groups are known for severely punishing anyone who tries to leave the group. So it is a form of intelligent self-preservation to only leave when there is no more possibility of staying. Of course, what particular thing makes any particular person reach that threshold is a reflection of their moral character. And IMHO, the only thing that helps that is prayer.

[Hawthorn]

>> I agree in principle, Hawthorn, but in practice both processes can interact with each other - it happened to me. I was raised democrat, but researched political theory and history for a long time, and became more and more upset with the liberal hypocrisies I was coming to understand. But because of my social environment, I consistantly refused the step of openly detaching myself from liberalism.

>> So my actual change of mind was gradual, which as you point out tends to reflect real change. But it was suppressed. So on the surface “nothing” was happening. Then after years of this, I watched the Waco inferno, and that finally did it for me - the dam finally broke. <<

A beautifully written comment, as regards not only its prose but also its obvious sincerity. Thanks for sharing your story1

Still, as a statistical matter, I’m inclined to think you’re in a pretty small minority.

But perhaps it doesn’t matter a great deal. A sincere conversion is a sincere conversion. Period.

And as for my post, I was mostly venting my frustration at the commentors who want to nitpick over Mamet’s conversion — because he doesn’t (yet?) agree with them on everything. Let’s hope they’re just acting childish and will eventually outgrow their immature behavior.