Well, not exactly. But I did receive an interesting email from Todd Peters that perfectly encapsulates the return of the Pinterian absurdist ethos:
Last night I watched one of the network news shows, something I rarely do. I think it was NBC but I’m not sure.
They were discussing the anti-war protests and were interviewing Tom Hayden. What made me laugh out loud was his explanation for why the anti-war protests had fizzled. His and by extension the show’s take on it, was that so many people so quickly recognized that this war was wrong and doomed, they felt there was no need to go out and protest.
So you see, the very lack of support is proof that there is overwhelming support! Somewhere Orwell and Kafka are sharing a drink and laughing until their stomachs hurt and their eyes are red with tears.
Well, in Hayden’s defense, he may also have added that with the mainstream press carrying the water for the anti-war contingent by spreading their propaganda for them (whether consciously, out of ideological sympathy; or incidentally, out of a growing turn from hard news to sensationalism), the need for the anti-war folks to hit the street with placards and giant paper mache puppet heads has been greatly reduced, freeing them up to…I dunno, troll rightwing websites under fake names, or maybe pursue their dream of making an entire village out of hemp and pasty white twenty-somethings in sandals and floppy leather sun hats.
****
h/t Stop the ACLU and Michelle Malkin
I think making an entire village out of hemp would be cool. At least it would be something I might like to see on vacation, as long as I could stand the smell of the tour guide that long.
He’s got a point. I mean, everyone recognizes that the character “Urkel” on the show Family Matters was evil. How many people do you see protesting it nowadays?
So, it’s like, logic, you know.
Perhaps I should step outside, two Jays in here might get confusing.
Hmmm.
The absolutely essential principle of having a huge turnout of protesters is to have skimply dressed chicks there. That’ll bring the men. Which will entice the women to show up. Which will bring more guys.
etc etc etc.
Frankly anti-war protests of the 1960’s were probably more a sexual hook-up thing that anything else. Why were they so successful then but failing now?
Because the chicks then were 18. Now they’re 60.
No offense to anybody but I’m not getting off my fat ass to go ogle some 60 year old broad with liberal values and a bad attitude.
Hey Jay (First and Third Comment), this is Jay (Second Comment).
One of us needs a new name. Flip you for it.
His and by extension the show’s take on it, was that so many people so quickly recognized that this war was wrong and doomed, they felt there was no need to go out and protest.
Dang, and I had “our appeal has become more selective” in the pool.
“It’s such a fine line between stupid, and clever.”
TW: Another fitting term from Spinal Tap
One might marvel at how much landfill space is taken up by giant paper-mache heads and other detrius of protests past………
Thanks for that very disturbing mental images.
Now where’d I put the mescal?