Toughing it Out

Introduction
I am climbing a steep learning curve about the publishing industry. The first-cut publisher is having internal problems, and great difficulty in laying out the text. So, I terminated my contract with them. Now I have to find another publisher. As a computer expert, I was able to create the required ready-to-print computer files in 5 long days. I am sure someone can print this book, pronto! So, my focus has changed. In the meantime, the various reactions to, and interpretations of, this book reveal it as the blind man's elephant. Friends and acquaintances have given me some advice ...

Introduction

I am climbing a steep learning curve about the publishing industry. The first-cut publisher is having internal problems, and great difficulty in laying out the text. So, I terminated my contract with them. Now I have to find another publisher.

As a computer expert, I was able to create the required ready-to-print computer files in 5 long days. I am sure someone can print this book, pronto! So, my focus has changed.

In the meantime, the various reactions to, and interpretations of, this book reveal it as the blind man's elephant. Friends and acquaintances have given me some advice ...

I should mention that, over the years, I have occasionally appeared on radio and TV. I am not shy. I stand behind my book. But my understanding of the book is clearly not the same as everyone else's. That supports my contention in GSQ that there is no common, objective "truth," but only subjective opinion.

Before passing to my perception of people's reactions to me and GSQ, I would like to say what I think the book is about. I outlined this in the "Preface" and "Plan of this Work," but who cares what I actually wrote there?

GSQ is my attempt to give philosophical foundation to the difference between the political "LEFT" and "RIGHT." It is not just about U.S. Democrats and Republicans.

I would like to answer the question, 'how is democracy justified?' The key premise of political democracy is that each elector has a valid opinion; that there is no fundamental way to discriminate the truth or rightness of one view from another. Thus, practical implementations of democracy come down to an arbitrary rule for deciding a winner. For example, majority rule is essentially an application of "might makes right" to the electoral pool. There are other rules that might be used, including general consent or consensus. As described, democracy is inherently relativist in its ethics and theory of knowledge. For that reason, democracy is fundamentally opposed to all forms of conservatism (the political Right). Conservatives, in varying degrees, always rely on authority to justify their political principles and actions. Conservative government is always authoritarian.

Once we realize that the Left stands for democracy, and the Right stands against it, lots of other stuff falls out. Here, readers must understand what the philosopher's job is: to clarify murky concepts, and present a consistent language. In other words, if one believes in democracy, and supposes it is a basic institution and approach to life, what follows? What must one also believe to be a democrat? This is where the philosophy gets very heavy. For example, being religious is inconsistent with being on the Left - as Karl Marx pointed out - because religious beliefs involve subscription to higher, absolute authority. Even beliefs in some sort of minimalist Newtonian Deity who started the Universe are just as inconsistent with democracy as ordinary religion.

There is nothing to prevent people from holding competely contradictory views, and acting now this way, and then that way. Thus, in GSQ, I hold that States based on illogical and unreasonable beliefs can not only exist, but persist for long periods. But I do think the internal inconsistencies eventually result in systemic failure. That is why I think the U.S. is headed for collapse, a prediction I share with several other sane thinkers.

How we behave, the beliefs we hold, constitute our culture. This is a difficult subject to discuss. I maintain we can change our culture, but that requires a very conscious choice. If we don't make the choice, the assumptions of culture simply guide us to whatever conclusions are indicated. Since beliefs are very subtle, it is often very difficult to predict what those conclusions might be. But, for example, if we are unable to break free of Biblical ideas about reproducing like rabbits, or stop using oil and other limited resources, we will bring ruin or ourselves and others.

Americans have an opportunity in this election year to make choices that change direction. Or, they can not measure up to the challenge. It's a matter of personal responsibility. NO EXCUSES. There's much more in the book.

Now, about some reactions.

First off, a number of relatives and acquaintances are clearly stunned by the impossible idea that I wrote a book. It just doesn't seem to them I could have done such a thing. I told one relative I have a book coming out soon, THREE TIMES, before being asked: "Oh, is it going to be published?" GSQ is a mirror in which what people think of me is clearly reflected. I am surprised by the number of acquaintances, friends and relatives who see me as basically incompetent, incapable and a ne'er-do-well. After all, "If you're so smart, how come you aren't rich (or President or CEO or whatever)?" I learned that most people simply have no regard for me, because I haven't plastered my walls with little certificates of recognition or Ben Franklins. This disgusts me, and is causing me to change significantly my attitudes and social relations.

Next, people who haven't read the book, or know very little about it, assume it is about whatever suits their fancy. It doesn't matter what I wrote, or how I explain it, they just see in it what they will. That frustrates me, but I have decided not to disabuse the blind about whatever; it's hopeless. That's because, when I try to correct people's opinions, they obviously consider me an insufferable snob. They don't like to be lectured. So, I am learning to let people jump off their private cliffs without parachutes. I'm getting hard hearted, just like conservatives.

I have been told I'm a smart guy, but a rotten saleman. The advice I get about selling the book amounts to this: sell out to the Philistines. So, having inveighed loudly and publically against whoring, I should open a whore house. This is like Jeff Faux's talk on CSPAN BOOK-TV a few weeks ago, in which he denounced elected Democrats as betrayers of the people, and then went on to accept there was no alternative to supporting Democrats! How are we changing the system, or saving ourselves from disaster?

One ultra-conservative lady, a Bandit supporter, was not only stunned speechless upon realizing I had actually written a book (the idiot talks!!!), but stood in awe for about 15 minutes. The vacancy was taken up by her even more rabidly Right husband, who thought he would cut me down to size (he's taller than me).

What have I learned from all this?

I am probably a lot better off confined to my small condo than I thought. Human contact seems to be corrosive. While I do not plan on becoming a hermit, or retiring to a cave in Nepal, I do plan to be more selective in my personal contacts.

I don't think I am a great genius, or that I have done anything very exceptional. But I am competent. I believe I have a better grasp on reality and the way the world works than about 95% of the people. Those beliefs are based on recent samplings.

I think I am going to stick to my guns; that is, what's in the book. Maybe I'll get lucky, and some of those publically notorious Conservatives will decide to attack me. That will sell the book. While I have major medical problems, so don't have the stamina of my younger self, I feel I can still give a good accounting of myself. Anyway, if I don't, I won't be around to be humiliated.

I do have another book in mind, probably a boring tome about ethical philosophy.