Cognitive Dissidence 101

What’s a cognitive dissident?

Well, in the simplest sense, it means I’m weird, and I admit it.

OK, what else does it tell you that’s not on my Facebook profile?
Let’s put it in political terms.

I might be a swing voter.

I remain a registered Democrat, although as I get older I find myself in accord with the Churchillian (or was it Clemenceauan? (is that the correct proper adjective?)) notion that one who is not a socialist at 20 has no heart, one who is a socialist at 40 has no brains. Or, maybe, I’m just getting closer a simpler notion expounded by the brother of a friend of mine: “Nobody dies a liberal.” (He was commenting more on the fact that his brother was attending an Ivy League school while he had graduated from a city school, but nonetheless.)

Yet, despite the fact that I find the positions expounded by the standard bearers of the Democratic Party increasingly rub me the wrong way, I find myself reluctant to a) admit that I might be (gulp) conservative, b) change my political affiliation, c) and even if I did change my political affiliation, admit it in public. All this despite the fact that I fast approach my 15th college reunion, and a decade and a half should be enough time to cure myself of youthful political sentiment based on…sentiment.

Politics are always sentiment with an admixture of self-interest. The balances are always in question: witness the liberals’ complaint that the working uneducated poor consistently vote against their economic interest because of, at best, religious sentiments or, at worst, unlettered bigoted sentiments; ditto conservatives' complaints that rich liberals vote their vague notions of guilt. (Or, in the case of people like George Soros, they have enough good people working for ‘em that they’ll never have to pay the tax hikes they advocate, so it becomes a question of apperances.)

I suppose, then, that the past 15 years leave me with a solid core of what I, for lack of a more accurate description, would call a vague caucasian/Jewish guilt-progressive-Democratic-hollywood-rock and roll-pop culture-sentiment. (Actually, forget the “lack of…”—if I had any more adjectives to add that would be as far as possible from conservative, I’d use those too. Further on, I probably will.)
In addition to the above political conundrum I’ve conveniently placed myself in, I also am (or claim to be) fiercely Judeocentric.

(That could mean a lot of things, but lets set two criteria for clarity’s sake: I am a Jew. I am pro-Israel. I realize that has probably discredited any liberal credentials I might claim to have, but bear with me.)

So much of my politics—particularly any positions I advocate as a result of my Judeocentrism—may lean toward what I would call apparently conservative, although some doctrinaire conservatives—particularly those of the paleo- variety—would be all too happy to disavow any conservative credentials I might claim even faster than doctrinaire leftists would disqualify my liberal notions. However, as I freely admit, were I to actually seek to place myself in one camp of the other, I would much rather be called liberal than conservative. It may be that no one dies a liberal, but I assume that no one wants to live as a fascist. (Unless one really has that kind of power. Or money. Like George Soros.)

As I realize that this is all of my own making, and I freely admit it, I become a dissident in whatever camp I place myself. If I get the chance to place myself in any camp at all. (The pro-Israel Judeocentric camp, maybe, but as I’ll give you the chance to read in the future, I may be a cognitive dissident in those camps as well. As some of you may already know, the politics within that bailiwick has a life—and mind—of its own.)

In a nutshell, this is probably the best way I can describe myself in political terms, and also to prepare you for what you are going to read on this blog. And, while there will be plenty of personal, one shouldn’t be surprised. As the doctrinaire (or, as I suppose might be more appropriate in my case, and as I will probably use from now on, “orthodox”) feminists used to say “the personal is political”. While that may or my not be true, bear in mind that the converse (or was it inverse?) definitely is true: the political is always personal.

That’s what the cognitive dissident is getting at.

(Oh, by the way, as I’m sure you’ve noticed by now, I have a tendency to (over)use parentheses. You tell me—you rather I use footnotes? I’m not gonna write any less.)