Evolutionary Inconvenience
When someone pointed out to the Liberals that they had voted in favor of the traditional definition of marriage (as a union between one man and one woman to the exclusion of any other) less than two years earlier, Jean Chretien, Paul Martin, and Martin Cauchon jumped up to say that things had changed, that societies evolve. With evolution, they imply, things change for the better.
What is more, when others pointed out to them that the evolutionary change of which they speak could bring about all sorts of unforeseen consequences such as polygamy, the same Liberals have steadfastly asserted, and here we include Cotler, that such things would never happen.
It is curious that two years ago they could not predict the "evolutionary" change of homosexual marriage, but they now can predict in all assurance what is going NOT to happen in the future.
The Liberal experiment cum (in)ability to read the future exhibited yet another facet today. CTV reports Paul Martin as saying that "the missile shield is a project in evolution." If one could expect Mr. Dithers to be consistent in the use of language, one would then expect him to say that Missile Defense is only going to get better. But he could not say that now, could he?
Suddenly, the future is now uncertain once again and the evocation of evolution is not an assurance of improvement. In fact, for as long as it's convenient, evolution now represents unforeseen flux and the possibility that things may not turn out right at all. In his own words: "It [missile defense] will continue evolving. And we don't know what the demands will be, for a project that is evolving because it will change."
Finally, Mr. Dithers has borrowed here from the Jean Chretien Encyclopedia of Logic. To say that a project is evolving because it will change is redundantly meaningless. One may as well say that a child will get older because she will grow.
Many who hoped that Mr. Dithers would "evolve" into a Prime Minister are at a crossroads. Their expectation of evolution involved change, and that change, too, expected better. But now that evolution simply means change, and change means evolution with no peculiar characteristics of amelioration, they are faced with the sad probability that Mr. Dithers will actually get worse: They simply "don't know what the demands will be."
Cross-posted to The Politic
What is more, when others pointed out to them that the evolutionary change of which they speak could bring about all sorts of unforeseen consequences such as polygamy, the same Liberals have steadfastly asserted, and here we include Cotler, that such things would never happen.
It is curious that two years ago they could not predict the "evolutionary" change of homosexual marriage, but they now can predict in all assurance what is going NOT to happen in the future.
The Liberal experiment cum (in)ability to read the future exhibited yet another facet today. CTV reports Paul Martin as saying that "the missile shield is a project in evolution." If one could expect Mr. Dithers to be consistent in the use of language, one would then expect him to say that Missile Defense is only going to get better. But he could not say that now, could he?
Suddenly, the future is now uncertain once again and the evocation of evolution is not an assurance of improvement. In fact, for as long as it's convenient, evolution now represents unforeseen flux and the possibility that things may not turn out right at all. In his own words: "It [missile defense] will continue evolving. And we don't know what the demands will be, for a project that is evolving because it will change."
Finally, Mr. Dithers has borrowed here from the Jean Chretien Encyclopedia of Logic. To say that a project is evolving because it will change is redundantly meaningless. One may as well say that a child will get older because she will grow.
Many who hoped that Mr. Dithers would "evolve" into a Prime Minister are at a crossroads. Their expectation of evolution involved change, and that change, too, expected better. But now that evolution simply means change, and change means evolution with no peculiar characteristics of amelioration, they are faced with the sad probability that Mr. Dithers will actually get worse: They simply "don't know what the demands will be."
Cross-posted to The Politic
posted by kaqchikel at
3/06/2005 04:31:00 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home