Monday, August 29, 2011

Dispatches from Libertopia: College Edition

College is a wonderful place. A community of people engaged in the same pursuits provides a welcoming environment that fosters speculation, intellectual adventure and novel risks. Perhaps credit for this falls on a positive context for self esteem or just on the suspicion that everyone else is equally frightened and prone to "fake it until they make it," but for many of us it's a rare chance to truly take conceptual leaps. Some of us shouldn't.

Sadly, for every kid who builds an airboat that runs off old McDonald's fryer oil, there are two pre-law Randroids who will militantly argue the affirmative case in, "Resolved: The United States should legalize indentured servitude for the benefit of poor people at or above the age of majority." Or there's a girl like Stephanie Grace, who employs that intellectual freedom to address whether black people possess subhuman intelligence, provided that one defines "human intelligence" as "white-people smart."

In fact, the abundance of bongs and the consequence-free collegiate bubble that repels the practical and harsh elements of reality often form the genesis of Libertarian sociopathy. Reality is a thought experiment; people and products are all numbers, and death, suffering, pain, neglect and contempt are just remainders that someone at George Mason or the University of Chicago with enough math degrees will eventually square away for good at no cost to the Libertarian explaining this.

You can see it now:
LOLBERTARIAN: Wait, what if, like... (does a huge bong rip) like, um, the poor people that you see and the poor people I see are two different things? But, like, we have no way of telling each other, because you can never see what I see?
RANDROID: Dude, (grabbing bong) duuuuuude. What if the poor people that I see are actually what you think are rich people?
LOLBERTARIAN: Ohmigod, dude, do you know what this means?
RANDROID: (whispering) We just cured poor people.
Then they both flash peace signs at each other, but they aren't peace signs at all. Their splayed index- and middle-fingertips touch, releasing an ecstatic musical tone. The Von Mises signal has just gone out to Thomas Sowell, Peter Suderman and John Stossel. Now we know there's no way to prove that poor people aren't wealthy.

Campus conservatives don't seem to do much better, if for nothing more than the loss of economic-policy distinctions between them and Von Mises drones. Take this story, "College Students in Favor of Wealth Distribution Are Asked to Pass Their Grade Points to Other Students," about a recent conservative graduate named Oliver Darcy. He and his buddies are right-wing media darlings, appearing in Andrew Breitbart's vomit journals, in The Blaze and Townhall, as well as on birther-rapper home planet, World Net Daily. Here's the rub:
Oliver Darcy, a recent college graduate, proposes that students with good grades contribute their GPA to their academically sluggish friends. He argues that this is how the federal government takes wealth from the country’s high wage earners and distributes it to the low income earners.
He then goes around and asks liberal students if they agree with it and — surely with zero doctoring via selective edits, as is Breitbart's editorial policy — many do. Bang, zoom! Take that, liberals. It's impossible to escape. The whole analogy works on every level.

For example, remember when you were in your sophomore year of college, and your grandmother died, and you inherited 500,000 GPAs? Remember how the size of your father's GPA and the GPA zoning of the part of town you lived in contributed to your having more access to GPAs and a better quality school, where they had all the new GPA books and a great GPA-to-student ratio? Wait, forget that. That actually proves the opposite of Darcy's point: that there are strong statistical corollaries between your parents' prosperity, and your environment, and the potential prosperity to which you yourself will have access.

Unless... when Oliver Darcy talks about equitable "social darwinism" in schools, he's actually analogizing that to an America in which there's a 100% inheritance tax, totally equal distribution of educational resources nationwide, and everyone's performance out of childhood is absolutely dependent on their own innate ability and personal determination, right? Of course not. Libertarian/conservative social darwinism always ends at home, because actually cutting the familial purse strings and making a fair fight of it for everybody would prevent our having an aristocracy and all the cool shit that brings us, like rack-rent and hemophilia.

Darcy's false analogy and false premises amount to so much intellectual aristocratic dogshit that you can almost choke on the bong vapors and hear him thoughtfully clacking the gold clip of his Montblanc Meisterstück against his capped teeth. Breaking it down any further only unjustly elevates it to the same stature as reasonable thought. Better just to yell at it, which my friend Brad wound up doing when I showed him the link:
Oh, did they make accumulation of GPA unlimited at some point? I must have missed that. I mean, if I had a 36,476.5 GPA while most students only averaged a 2.8... sure, I'd give them some of my GPA. Especially if you still only need a 2.0 to graduate and a 4.0 to be considered "perfect." What do I need all that extra GPA for? Oh. They didn't do that? They must have capped wealth then for this analogy to make any fucking sense at all. No? Oh, the idea is just retarded then.

I think that this guy actually pointed out what's wrong with the economy. The use of money at all is the problem. Everyone should just be competing for credit-rating grades. If you have a 4.0, you get to buy whatever you want. Doesn't matter how hard you work or how you invest or how much money you inherit, if you earn a 4.0 credit rating, you can buy whatever you want. You're at the top. Slackers get lower grades. At 1.9 you are shot in the face, and your family is charged for the bullet.

I mean, I never finished college and I can see how fucking stupid this analogy is. Why aren't other college students, who by default are more educated than I, figuring out that the question is bullshit and that the guy is an idiot? I feel like I'm taking crazy pills. What's even more irritating is the fact that I'm not upset so much about his obvious political agenda, as I am with his shoddy logic. What an asshole.
Still, there's a hidden pleasure to be found in Darcy's wealth/GPA analogy. It's the revelation that Libertarians and conservatives support the redistribution of knowledge: they fling it away from themselves with great force.

13 comments:

  1. Oh yeah? Well if you're so smart, how come you're not rich yet?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Your being able to frame the story in a humorous manner makes it sting a little less when I consider that these people have the lion's share of media and political power, and I don't see them losing it until we're reduced to hunter-gatherer tribes again. Maybe.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Tell me that clown Darcy didn't look in the mirror after sloppily tying his tie, raise his arms over his head and say "I'm a big boy!"

    ReplyDelete
  4. "Why aren't other college students... figuring out that the question is bullshit and the guy is an idiot?"

    You don't have to be smart to get into college, as the guy himself proves.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Welp at least I know what I'm getting into when PolSci comes around.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I guess another take home message from Darcy's analogy is that poor people are dumber and lazier than the rich.

    ReplyDelete
  7. So if I understand this correctly, your counter-argument is: to be wealthy you must have inherited money from your family or grown up in a prosperous environment where you yourself had easy access to prosperity? Forgetting the fact that anyone whose parents make over around $100,000/year will have to pay for their college education completely out-of-pocket, where a student from a poor family can go to school on the tax payers' dime through financial aid. Soon you won't even have to be a citizen it seems: http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2011/aug/31/senate-oks-state-college-aid-illegal-immigrants/

    The point of Darcy's comparison is that when you take from those who earn more (whether they earn a GPA or a wage) and give to those who earn less, eventually the higher earners see that they don't have to work hard to "get their fair share". When they stop working as hard and don't earn as much, there is then less for the low earners to take from them and the "class average" comes down for everyone.

    Yes, some wealthy Americans inherited their money. Some. Would you like to just completely disregard those who had a great idea, learned to provide a great service or just worked their asses off? Why should you take from them and give to someone who flunked out of high school and is now working at your favorite fast food joint? Is the analogy not the same in this situation? People work hard to earn their salary in the same way that people work hard to earn a GPA. If someone doesn't want to put the work in to EARN either of those things, then they shouldn't be taking from those who do!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Hey, everyone, let's all point and laugh at the idiot without any reading comprehension skills that posted right up there. Ahahahaha. What an idiot.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Man that was a lot of words to say "I hate poor people".

    ReplyDelete
  10. Totally. "ZOMG!!! CLASS WARFARE!" Would do.

    ReplyDelete
  11. So if I understand this correctly...
    Unsurprisingly, you don't.

    ReplyDelete
  12. "where a student from a poor family can go to school on the tax payers' dime through financial aid." All of which is paid back with interest, you fucking moron.

    ReplyDelete
  13. But. But. But. The TV said all the poor people have fridges. Since I put all my brain power towards building this awesome pipe out of a N64 controller, that automatically means they all have what I think of when I hear 'refrigerator,' a giant, hulking, stainless steel monstrosity.
    And they have to have electricity to run the refrigerator, right? People in huts don't have electricity! I'm rich and dumb and young and sheltered and I don't have any ability to comprehend 'poor' as being anything other than the lady with the shopping cart full of junk that counts train cars all day, and sleeps in the Harvest Market dumpster.

    Hey, you guys ever tried salvia? It's legal!

    ReplyDelete

Et tu, Mr. Destructo? is a politics, sports and media blog whose purpose is to tell jokes or be really right about things. All of us have real jobs and don't need the hassle that telling jokes here might occasion, which is why some contributors find it more tasteful to pretend to be dead mass murderers.