9/11 as a Deep Political Event

[Lauren Johnson]

My last post presented the much maligned Jeffrey Orling as having made a barely acceptable case for the 911 attack as a deep political event. I give him a C-. But within the bounds of PDS's def'n of deep politics, I gotta say it passes. I don't like it. I really don't like it. It was crap.

It's as if ... [things get hazy, and the room begins to spin]

I am a teacher who thinks he as done a great job explaining a difficult subject, and then the class stinker slides through barely passing making me look like a fool. But I have to pass the guy. He was right. Phil Dragoo, on the other hand, gets an A+ ... again. He's one of my best students ever. But it eats at me that the student I really disliked passes. In fact, even that C- is going to get me called into the Dean's office for a little talking to when he and his parents complain.

Then I have to sit down and ask, What happened? What did I do wrong? Then I get it. In my teaching, I was engaged in conceptual slippage. When I thought I was giving examples of deep political events, they were in fact parapolitical events. I started off the class making the distinction, and then from that point on the distinction vanished. My best stuff in what I was calling deep politics was in fact parapolitics and I never realized it.

I know what I'll do. I raise that kid's grade to a B+ so I don't get called into the Dean's office. And I teach the course exactly the same. Nobody cares. Nobody notices. It's a popular class. So what if the thinking gets a little sloppy.

I pour myself a whiskey and think: It just really doesn't matter. Nobody cares. Let's just let it slide.

I wake up. Jesus, what a bad dream. I glad you all of that never happened. ... Wait ...