home > archive > 2001 > this article
Dear Dr. Progressive
web posted July 16, 2001
Confused and liberal? Send your questions to the good doctor at firstname.lastname@example.org
Dear Dr. Progressive,
I have noticed that you sometimes give advice to leftist couples who are having trouble making a go of it. Perhaps you can help me. I am a 34-year-old woman who has been married for 6 years to a Marxist professor. I was his student and loved all the Marxist stuff. I thought he was so smart and that we were both going to change the world. But I kind of grew bored with the whole thing. Things were good for about 3 years -- in terms of him telling me we were going to lead the revolution -- but now it is really get tough. He has recently explained to me that Marxism teaches that marriage is prostitution. I wish he had told me this before we got married!!! When I ask him if he considers me a prostitute he just shrugs his shoulders and doesn't say anything. Then what does that make him, my pimp?
I find we don't communicate anymore. He rarely opens up about how he feels about Marxism and when he does and I start asking what kind of practical application Marxism has, he starts feeling blamed and pressured. He pulls away from me a lot, and I think he feels that I do not appreciate his views about Marxism. But how can I appreciate it if he never says anything more than that marriage is a form of capitalist prostitution? Then why did we get married?
I want to start doing fun things with my husband, but he says we must focus on the revolution. Frankly I am getting a little bit weary of this whole thing. When exactly is this revolution going to happen? Will we finally have sex when the revolution occurs? We've never had sex because he says we must not submit to the capitalist construction of pleasure. But then how can I be a prostitute if I do not have sex?
I am confused. Should I be considering divorce?
Divorce? Under such bliss? This is what the beauty of Marxism is all about!
Stay married. Don't worry, he'll change soon. Really, he will. The revolution will probably happen in a few months. Trust me on this one. I have very reliable sources.
Dear Dr. Progressive,
I'm wondering how you could imagine that I am on the far right; though, I do know that opposite extremes often end up meeting each other. I am opposed to globalization as it is headed today-- that is, the spread of a corporate produced American Coke/McDonald's/Hollywood culture, or Americanization.
The conservatives that you may have me confused with have a deep-rooted belief in isolationism at all costs -- the foreign-phobia I referred to earlier (the "Them damn fur'ners!" syndrome). I did not mean to convey any fear of a New World Order, just concern for those who suffer solely for the financial benefit of some multinational corporation.
Maybe this is what you meant about me being on the far right: I am very conservative when it comes the environment. Yes, I am all for conservation. I want to conserve God's gift to us all. That is conservative; you've got me there.
Back to the question at hand. Here's what I suggest:
(1) a multinational economy with strict, standardized regulations as good or better than those in place in the United States for human rights, environmental, and political intrusion. As of now, few of these regulations are enforced or even exist.
(2) an economy that outlaws multinational corporations thereby preventing any of these abuses in the first place.
The latter is much less appealing, obviously. I don't think these are really extreme views, but Americans don't realize that the corporations in charge would never accept anything close to these conditions.
I can appreciate the benefits of globalization but those are definitely not them. The true benefits would be diffusion of cultures, work toward a common good, and the spread of tolerance worldwide. Any questions?
P.S. I am aware that you are "Dr. Progressive," but you are writing for a conservative publication. I am "Dr. Reactionary." Think of me as writing for a liberal publication.
Dear Dr. Reactionary,
You make some very good points. I thought that there was almost no hope for you to become a leftist, until the end of your letter, because that's when you started sounding like one.
For instance, what do you mean that the "diffusion" of cultures would be a good thing? Are you against there being different cultures? So what kind of culture will there be in your utopia?
What exactly is the "common good"? Will individuals have to submit their will to it? Now you are sounding like a good little leftist, since you are implying that you support the subordination of the individual to the state.
And what do you mean about it being a good thing that there will be "the spread of tolerance worldwide"? Tolerance for what exactly? Tolerance for sexual perversion? Or tolerance for the cultures that you wish will be diffused?
Other related articles: (open in a new window)
© 1996-2013, Enter Stage Right and/or its creators. All rights reserved.