[piytar]

I thought it was satire at first, too. Started waffling about midway through. The following paragraph at the end clinched it for me that Stein was serious:

“But also because instead of an actual dictator, I think what we need is to recognize that social mores require government nudges like the ones Bloomberg creates and Obama adviser Cass Sunstein advocates. We live in a connected age in which our liberties bump against one another. I know this is all easy to say since I’m not a smoker, a soda drinker or a columnist whom politicians listen to. But in an age of overwhelming choice, some dictatorial direction would help. Plus, then Obama wouldn’t have to be on TV so much.”

Why, Because if it was satire, Stein would have either gone WAY over the top here to drive the satirical point home or would have blown up his own premise. Instead, he did a mild back-off to what is apparently the actual point, with a little humor thrown in to make it more palatable. That’s not satire, that’s an attempt at persuasive writing.

[kenavi]

That’s not satire, that’s an attempt at persuasive writing.

I cede the point to you.

When the greatest good on earth is to be healthy and live long, there's not much reason to oppose a benevolent dictatorship.

But if the greatest good is for mortal beings to work individually or freely associate with others to connect with the Eternal,then Government is kept in its place: impinge on human free choice as little as possible.

[JohnQ1]

Yeah, I’ve been kind of (cough) hammered on my attempt to be “kind”. The jury’s vote seems to be eleven to one, so I’ll think about it for a few years, and *probably* admit that I *may* have been *slightly* mistaken. SOB! You’re all MEAN!

[thouworm]

Satire or not? ...softening up the ground?

among the highlights: posts 1, 14, 21. 25, 32 (the smoking gun, in my mind)

“That’s not satire, that’s an attempt at persuasive writing.”