Bodies politic

[cjsmith]

There's a stereotype that you can't really be a good little conservative if you're not able-bodied. I don't really know how true it is. I've never much tried to be a good little conservative.

It's obvious, on the other hand, that you can't be a good little liberal if you're not able-bodied. Fortunately, I don't particularly care to be a good little liberal either.

Comments

[rfrench.livejournal.com]

We won't solve this problem unless each person contributes.

Rats. You are personally going to be responsible for global warming destroying our planet.

[cjsmith.livejournal.com]

It's all meeeeee! Bwa ha ha haaaa!

[leback.livejournal.com]

Oh, goody, that whole "everyone should be getting around on their own steam" thing again... I hate the assumption that everybody's capacities are the same -- or maybe it's the assumption that greater capacities in this regard are a matter of virtue rather than happenstance. The "Oh, I bike 40 miles a day" guys don't really expect the rest of us to do the same; they just enjoy having the excuse to sneer at us about it.

In addition to the ableism factor, there's a note of classism in it all, too -- the alternative posed to being a marathon biker/walker is always "live closer to stuff, use public transit more." Which is great if one can afford that (I am *thrilled* not to have to drive regularly in Seattle traffic!), but again, having that option is usually more luck than virtue.

None of which is to say that I'm not concerned about cars and what they're doing to the environment...but I'd rather see attention devoted less to moral exhortation to give up cars, and more to social and technological changes that make them (at least, in their present environmentally-damaging forms) less necessary. If you ask me, it's actually a very typically conservative mindset that underlies rhetoric like what you linked to -- the idea that the answer to every problem lies in better individual choices, rather than social change...

[cjsmith.livejournal.com]

The "Oh, I bike 40 miles a day" guys don't really expect the rest of us to do the same; they just enjoy having the excuse to sneer at us about it.

Yes indeed. I haven't met many athletic individuals who aren't smug about it. (I'm having trouble coming up with any.)

In addition to the ableism factor, there's a note of classism in it all, too

Absolutely. Seeing these ideas presented as "liberal" prompts my patented cynical smile. "Liberal" has changed meaning quite a bit over the years, and I think it's morphing again.

If you ask me, it's actually a very typically conservative mindset that underlies rhetoric like what you linked to -- the idea that the answer to every problem lies in better individual choices, rather than social change...

Wow, I've never perceived that as a uniquely conservative thing. If it ever was, I'm positive it isn't now. I see big heaping bucketsful of that from both today's conservatives and today's liberals.

One thing that makes better individual choices fun to propose is that the proposer gets to feel good about himself in comparison to all those unenlightened others. Patting oneself on the back feels good. I'm no exception. :-)

[leback.livejournal.com]

I haven't met many athletic individuals who aren't smug about it.

That may just be because if they're not smug, they don't come across as "athletic." akosut has gotten to where he bikes close to ten miles a day, and probably walks another four or five, but his attitude about it is very low-key, and so it doesn't even tend to occur to me that he's "one of those cyclist types." :-)

Wow, I've never perceived that as a uniquely conservative thing. If it ever was, I'm positive it isn't now. I see big heaping bucketsful of that from both today's conservatives and today's liberals.

I tend to think of the relevant axis as "conservative/radical" (i.e., the distinction between wanting to preserve the dominant social organization, and wanting to revolutionize it) rather than "conservative/liberal." "Liberal" is a term that means different things to different people -- the balance of conservatism and radicalism in it varies -- but in contemporary mainstream politics, it seems to apply to ideologies that are basically conservative but want to make modest alterations to the window dressing on the status quo. My self-assigned function is to point that out wherever it crops up. :-)

[cjsmith.livejournal.com]

That may just be because if they're not smug, they don't come across as "athletic."

Maybe, although I've also now come up with a non-smug athlete: an ex-coworker who runs ultramarathons. He too is low-key about it, but nobody will ever mistake him for someone who doesn't use his body. :-)

I tend to think of the relevant axis as "conservative/radical" (i.e., the distinction between wanting to preserve the dominant social organization, and wanting to revolutionize it)

*nod* Yeah, ok, I can see that. Along that axis, US Democrats and Republicans are pretty much in the same boat, just trying to row in different directions.

[hitchhiker.livejournal.com]

there are worse self-assigned functions :)

[jtidwell.livejournal.com]

Oh dear. I hope I never came across as smug, back when I was would bike to work a lot.

Then again, I wasn't ever that athletic, so not much to be smug about. :-)