|
|
July 30, 2008Buster vs the paying publicYou’ve all seen the Che tee shirt, right? The iconic shot of beret-wearing Che Guevara’s face proudly worn by many who likely have no idea who the guy actually was. The other afternoon, working his summer job making steaming lattes, frappes and other delectable beverages for people willing to spend an enormous amount on coffee and coffee-related-confections in this woeful and nearly depressed economy, Buster found himself facing - for too many times in one day - a coffee lover wearing Che on his chest. Buster was bored steaming milk, and he decided to have a little fun. “I like your shirt,” he said to the customer, as he handed him his coffee. The customer gave a thumbs up sign, “Hey, righteous!” Buster handed him his change, smiled and leaned back a bit, saying, “But I think I like mine better.” And he lifted up his work shirt to reveal this one:
“Enjoy your coffee,” Buster said. The customer, not pleased, puffed out his cheeks, left the store. Buster’s boss, who likes him because he has a good work ethic, and will work 60 hours a week, if he’s needed, shook his head at Buster and said, “okay for a summer job, but you’re clearly not cut out to work with the public.” When he told me the story later, I dutifully told him - as a parent - that he should not provoke the customers, and I asked him if he still thought he might go into politics, someday. “Maybe someday,” he said. “Depends on who wins in the next 20 years, the Che shirts, or the No-Che’s.” I think we’re all curious about that contest. http://theanchoressonline.com/2008/07/30/buster-vs-the-paying-public/trackback/ 10 Responses to “Buster vs the paying public” |
July 30th, 2008 at 7:17 pm
Sounds to me like he should go into poltics right now. He certainly has enough independence of mind and clarity of political view to be volunteering to make the phone calls, canvas the key registered voters in the neighborhood, and help with data entry in the database, particularly since he has such a strong work ethic. The heat of August is about the time that campaigns get a little short of motivated work ethic, and I’m sure the campaign of his choice would welcome him with open arms.
I would say to him, and you, that there is no waiting around for the US Cavalry to arrive and stop the Che shirts from winning, if that be his desire, or yours. You can take a quick look at Pollster.com to see what I mean, and the future 20 years from now will be his future whether he participates in shaping it politically or not. Almost thirty years ago I made the decision to “wait out” the Reagan presidency while I pursued my private interests. It was probably the worst decision of my life.
Now I have never worn a Che shirt myself, for I learned very early the difference between fashion and substance and have never had the looks to convincingly follow fashion, but I think we can presume that Buster’s politics and mine are not very congruent. I frankly anticipate that my own death will occur before those twenty years are up and I’m beginning to think that I might be quite satisfied with the political climate of my declining years.
Today [along with thousands of other politically active Democrats] I received a confidential e-mail from Hillary Clinton speaking of the genuine possibility of a fillibuster-proof Democratic Senate to accompany a Democratic Presidency. Now I’m sure you will agree that four years ago–when we were apparently separating into a gigantic and red United States of America finally subduing a tiny blue Starbucksland–absolutely no one would have dreamed of this.
Will it happen? Time will tell. But I’m perfectly certain that if it does happen the Democratic President will not thoughtlessly fritter away the political advantage of it–unlike the current Republican President did with his victory and his Congressional majority. He has the brains, the flexibility, and the people skills to make the most of it. So, if it does happen, America may well be a radically different place in 20 years. It certainly has become so over the past 30 years.
The irony of it is that the famous luxury coffee shop business is one of the few large businesses still owned, operated, and largely staffed, by Americans, as nearly all businesses were 30 years ago, and it has been, as well, more active, as a good business practice, in fostering the welfare of its employees than any other business I know.
So I don’t think we need to give up lattes for Recessiom, whatever we may choose to give up for Lent.
[The luxury coffee shop is not the one you think it is. And the president did not "fritter away" his one-party advantage; the party itself engaged in debate and disagreement because - regardless of how some might like to paint it, the GOP is not a lock-step monolith (and when it's congressional members are discovered to be corrupt rats, they're told to resign by the party, but that's another subject). Since the GOP actually contains members who have differing thoughts (and who sometimes cross the aisle) rather than simply obeying the command from on high - and because they spent money as well as any Democrats and skulked in the background instead of actually showing spine when it would have counted, they lost their advantage. Whether the one-party system - the idea of which filled the left with horror just a few years ago, but which now seems so attractive - will serve all of the interests of all of the people of this nation will be interesting to watch. You'll understand, of course, if those suddenly finding things going "horribly out of control" in that case - remind you of yourselves not so long ago, which - I know - means you'll be all tolerant and understanding about it. Probably in an insufferably passive aggressive way!
As to Buster, he'll engage in politics when he is raedy to, thanks, Joseph. As you commented earlier - he might be in moral peril if he engages incorrectly, after all. - admin]
July 30th, 2008 at 8:06 pm
I like the T-shirt. I seldom saw any Ché shirts because, when I was an undergrad, it seemed to be the Socialist Workers’ uniform as they tried to sell their newpaper.
July 30th, 2008 at 8:20 pm
Ugh - pushed the button too soon….
I had a Ukrainian student who wore a Ché shirt even after she learned about him, including his blatant hypocrisy and support of world-wide nuclear war. “It’s still a cool shirt,” she said. That says it all, doesn’t it?
July 30th, 2008 at 10:43 pm
The philosophy of government and public life which enlivens the Republican Party is not my philosophy of government and it is not the philosophy of government which enlivens the Democratic Party.
I do not believe that the best government is the least government; I do not believe that nebulous and unregulated “market forces” can be trusted to make a better life for all of us; I do not believe that infinite economic growth is either possible or desirable; I do not think that the climate change and species depredation I personally have watched carefully in my own state and town for the past twenty years is either a myth or “merely natural” and not manmade; I do not believe that the United States is inherently a “Christian nation”; I do not think that military force should be America’s first resort when handling international relations; I do not think that military preparedness, or any other government service, can be funded forever by infinite borrowing without paying more taxes; I do not think that there is a special sub-class of human being called an “enemy combatant” who should not be offered equality under our law; and I do not believe that “democracy” [in the strict sense of fair elections only] is a universal panacea when it separated from the legal restraint on executive power that is the only real protection of liberty under law for everybody.
These things I do not believe are a perfectly coherent and consistent philosophy, shared commonly, I think, by most in the Republican Party and they lead inevitably and inexorably to quite specific policy choices radically incompatible with the policy choices that I am comfortable with.
Beliefs like this really do make a difference–incompatible premises lead to incompatible results.
The 2004 elections gave the President and his party the best chance that anyone who believes in this philosophy has ever had to reshape America in its image. They made no serious attempt to take advantage of it.
Personally, I’m grateful for this. But, as a student of history, I know that the watershed elections of 1860, 1932, and 1964 were watershed elections because the party that won them used them to radically change this country based on the philosophy of government that they brought to the table. 2004 could have been such a watershed election. 2004 could have made the “Reagan Revolution” permanent and irreversible. But the people who won it simply didn’t follow through.
Whatever may have been the case during the 20th century concerning any passive aggressive Liberal complacency leading to an impudent and condecending “tolerance” of other points of view, it evaporated in the aftermath of the Whitewater investigation; under the pressure of “Sore Loserman”; in the face of the tactics used to defeat Tom Dashele, Max Cleland, and John Kerry–and used to slander John Murtha and Daniel Inouye; and in the face of the whole sorry misadventure that has occurred since we lost the battle of Tora Bora.
I doubt there is a committed and active Democrat in this country that has forgotten any of this. So I doubt you will see much of the old condesension, whatever the result of the next election. If there is any “liberal” who does not believe that the politics of the past eight years have been a clash of radically incompatible ideas about what America should be and how America should act, I don’t know of them.
But beyond that, America deserves far more political participation than it gets from its citizens, whatever their point of view. Mere voting really isn’t enough, and not enough of us do even that. There is one good thing, however. I seldom hear anyone say these days that who gets elected doesn’t make a difference. It does. Whatever Buster does or does not do, I hope he understands that.
July 31st, 2008 at 8:09 am
Modern liberal (definitely not in the same vein as classical liberalism) “tolerance” extends only to those who agree with modern liberal programs and policies. It’s not conservatives who try to silence debate via the Fairness Doctrine or regulating the websites of Republican House and Senate members, and I cannot think of one example where a conservative college administrator (do any even exist?) thought the imposition of a campus speech code was a good idea. Moreover, its not enough to agree to disagree on these issues, if you don’t agree with the liberal line you aren’t just wrong, you’re evil. And somehow, those on the left can say whatever they want, Murtha and Michelle Obama are good examples, while being somehow totally above rebuke or criticism. Liberal “tolerance” is one step away from political reeducation camps.
And Joseph, Murtha wasn’t slandered. He did the slandering when he accused those marines of being “cold blooded killers.” When all of them were cleared of any wrongdoing, did he offer any kind of apology? Didn’t think so.
July 31st, 2008 at 8:55 am
Military intervention in Iraq followed YEARS (back to a good deal of the Clinton era)of U.N. resolutions, followed by Saddam Hussein thumbing his nose at all and sundry while the U.N. “oil for food” program continued to line the pockets of many and accomplish virtually nothing for the indigent Iraqui citizens. Saddam had a multitude of chances to eschew terrorism of those inside and outside his world and he chose not to do so. And lest you have had your head buried somewhere of late, we DID find 500 tons of yellowcake in Iraq and did not publicize it (until after it had been safely transported elsewhere) lest some crazy over there try to lay hands on it.
Believing the fairy tales of Tom Daschle, Max Cleland and John Kerry is indicative of limited ability to research effectively. Saying that John Murtha, the pork king, was somehow slandered when in fact he slandered the U.S. Marines over the Haditha incident (definitely proven to be foul slander on Murtha’s part - for which he has never apologized) is ludicrous.
As to the “clash” of ideas over the last 8 years, you bet your bippy there has been a clash - between a bunch of lily-livered cowards who think if you just “talk to the bully” the bully won’t hurt you (I’m at least as far away from the schoolyard as you are Joseph and I still remember that lesson quite well - if you don’t stand your ground, you’ll be under it) and an actual LEADER who, despite a constant and unremitting (and 99% inaccurate) pounding by the looney left has maintained his dignity, his composure, his humanity and his steady vision of what needed to be done - sorry Joseph, you’ve been at the Kool-Aid jug far too long.
And just to establish things here Joseph, I am 66 years old, well-educated and industrious enough to get my information from other sources than DNC or MoveOn.org talking points.
July 31st, 2008 at 8:57 am
Anchoress - your son Buster is a treasure. This is a fact of which I am sure you are well aware. You’ve done a brilliant job of parenting both your sons.
July 31st, 2008 at 9:10 am
He’s not ready for politics yet. Disagreeing without being disagreeable is a tricky business, particularly when you are in a customer service business and you’re disagreeing with a customer. The day Buster pulls that off is the day he is ready for congress (afterall, making that kid feel stupid or uncomfortable isn’t going to win his vote).
Good luck to him, don’t lose the attitude, just channel it.
July 31st, 2008 at 12:52 pm
I love it…it’s nice to see someone speak ‘truth to power’ from a fact-based perspective. As a public high school teacher, I see a handful of Che’ t-shirts, and unfortunately, an increasing number of “CCCP” shirts worn as fashion statements among uninformed adolescents in the middle class community in which I live. I will ask my students if wearing a Nazi shirt would be acceptable, and the cacophony of “NO’s” drowns out my laughter. I then explain how the “CCCP” shirt is a pretty solid equivalent, if not, worse. They nod in surprise, and hopefully will communicate that information to their peers. God Bless Buster for fighting the good fight.
August 1st, 2008 at 10:09 am
Love that story, love your kid! To be young and wise to the realities of Che and other loony stuff gives me hope for our young folk. I agree with the other commenter; your son sounds like he is ready for public life right now. If he is young and not intimidated into dopeyness and lefty looniness, he can do anything.
Brava, Anchoress!