"But that, like socialism itself, is an impure ideal, as it’s impossible to get through a shared supper without someone (or everyone) feeling like an autocrat: There is the bully who orders for the entire table, the allergy sufferer who regrets forcing her sensitivities upon friends, the hungry person who snags the last lobster ravioli and is then filled with shame. If in other realms it is prudent to share, here is an opportunity for everyone to feel heard by doing the opposite. In that sense, at least, ordering — and eating — for one’s self is downright democratic."
The last paragraph of "At Restaurants, Thank You for Not Sharing/After a decade of treating every plate like a pie, individual dishes are making a welcome comeback" by Kurt Soller (in the NYT).
Meanwhile, in the politics that is not food, "Four in 10 Americans Embrace Some Form of Socialism" (Gallup).
May 21, 2019
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
64 comments:
I'm the 8th of 9 children so I am uncomfortable with "family-style" eating--getting lots of dishes that the whole table shares. I worry too much about being left hungry to enjoy the meal. Still I like the idea.
To the other points--I have no idea what this person is talking about. I've never sat at a table where someone orders for everyone. Have you? I've never sat at a table, outside of marriage, where someone pushes their allergies onto the others. Have you? They just don't eat the dishes they can't eat. And I have sat at far more tables where the last piece sits there getting cold because no one wants to take the last piece then I have someone being shamed for taking the last piece. That doesn't even make sense.
None of these folks who embrace some form of socialism will travel to Venezuela. Perhaps because there are no zoo animals left to share for meals.
Selfish people posing as sharers.
There are people who see everything through a political prism. Those people are known as assholes. Leave me the fuck alone and keep your politics to yourself.
The article discusses things I've never experienced. Usually the last piece is conspicuously avoided. Almost nobody of a certain age has a food allergy that affects other people.
There is no bully who orders for the whole table without considerable negotiation. Or, in certain circumstances, we call that person mom. Or maybe dad. And even then there is negotiation with the kids.
This is more coastal faux-elitism bull shit.
Give me a meat and three.
"Even the opponents of Socialism are dominated by socialist ideas." -- Ludwig von Mises
"Food is always political..."
Rubbish.
But that, like socialism itself, is an impure ideal, as it’s impossible to get through a shared supper without someone (or everyone) feeling like an autocrat
But, isn't that the point? the laborers labor; while the dictator dictates. Everyone does what they are good at. Some people are born to toil in the kitchen, while others are born to set the menus. It seems that the only people that complain are the intransigents; who should be either shot, or sent to re-education camps
LONG LIVE SOCIALISM!!! 40% of Americans are So Stupid as to want it, don't we Deserve it, good and hard?
American conservatives made a fatal error when they chose to describe Social Security and Medicare as “socialism.” American teenagers say, “Grandma likes her Social Security and Medicare so I guess I’m a socialist too.”
People who embrace socialism are embracing the theoretical concept, not the reality. And they are blind to the difference.
Socialism is just a trendy word used by selfish ignorant coddled people to signal their caring and daring mindset. But in fact it is not a pose in an op-ed but a very real totalitarian program, with a long and consistent record of control, oppression and theft. As the saying goes: “It’s all fun and games until someone loses an eye.” So too here: people who claim to favor socialism have no idea of the waste and misery it always brings.
For one recent and excellent perspective, try Ryszard Legutko’s “The Demon in Democracy: Totalitarian Temptations in Free Societies.”
The long march thru our institutions is paying off. Right Chuck Todd?
The poll results are actually encouraging. [Not that I take polls seriously]. And the term 'some form of socialism' is misleading regarding what is considered 'socialism' by the pollster.
In communist era apartment in Russia there would be one kitchen per floor and everyone would share. When Stalin was still a gangster bank robber all the plots were conducted in kitchens so they didn't want anyone to have their own.
The poll didn't ask what aspects of socialism they are okay with. (Should the government plan the economy? Should it own the "commanding heights" of industry? Should workers own the means of production? Etc.) The poll didn't even give a definition of "socialism": probably a good choice as even socialists can't agree on what it means.
As Earnest Prole suggested, my guess is that people who are "okay" with socialism think about the various social welfare programs we and other countries have as "socialism," when in fact they were first introduced by German Chancellor Otto von Bismarck as a way of defusing the left of his time.
Earnest Prole made a fatal error when he ascribes conservatives' involvement in Social Security or Medicare.
What we actually do is note it will bankrupt the country.
What a maroon.
Larry J said: There are people who see everything through a political prism. Those people are known as assholes.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Friend, you are much too generous. These people, 99% of whom are leftist, have destroyed more friendships and poisoned holiday dinners with relations than anything else I can think of.
"The personal is political" for them. They should be shunned.
If I snag the last lobster ravioli, I’m not filled with shame, I’m filled with lobster.
If there wasn't a certain Mexican robber baron , the times couldn't keep the lights on.
I'm the 8th of 9 children so I am uncomfortable with "family-style" eating
I’m the oldest of nine children and always resented that dinner was divided equally into eleven portions even though I was six times the size of my youngest brother.
When I had my own family we preserved the family-style dinners and told the kids they could eat as much as they wished as long as you finished everything on your plate.
Everyone is a socialist in their own family.
The counter to socialism is freedom.
Conservatives support free people and free markets.
We recognize that without free markets there won't be free people.
We further recognize that free people will do stupid things and that charity is a better solution than government coercion.
Socialists demand control.
They restrict freedom.
It starts with market control.
It ends with deprivation and suffering - nobody has control then.
The Gods of the Copybook Headings will not be denied.
What a maroon
Fighting the good fight against Red Social Security with a rapier wit.
Socialism has the word social in it. Free ice cream!
Bar the doors, set up a fence:
https://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/progressive-colonialism-southern-discomfort/?
Why do people dine out with people the don't like enough to talk with? "Wow! That lobster ravioli is fantastic, Sue, want to split the last one? No? Any one?...
Dining together is a joyful event. A joyful shared event. Not a competition, not chores to be tended to and completed. It's fun, its talk,and connection, it has little to do with sustenance. It is not jackals fighting over the last bits of a gazelle.
Talk about first world problems.
Food is always political...
Why can't I just eat my waffle?
Food is not always political.
Lack of food is always political.
Hey, Earnest Prole.
Way to go taking on the central point which is that conservatives were involved (except thru exercise of the monopoly of force directed by the state) with Social Security.
That bald assertion (READ: meritless untruth) of yours is nonsense.
But do go forward challenging Bugs Bunny.
“Have you ever heard of a wish sandwich?”
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=NepkGHEd2B0
Somewhere is one of Nabokov's early work he tells a fable of nine Germans Socialists and a Russian on a train trip. The Socialists insist that all share their food. Each German has brought an identical sausage, the Russian a cucumber. The Germans grab the cucumber and throw it out the train window, saying that the Russian's sausage has turned green. Each German then cuts a piece of his own sausage to feed the Russian and talks of the sense and humane values of Socialism, while the Russian wishes he had his cucumber back.
That bald assertion (READ: meritless untruth) of yours is nonsense.
┈┈┈┈┈┈▕▔╲
┈┈┈┈┈┈┈▏▕
┈┈┈┈┈┈┈▏▕▂▂▂
▂▂▂▂▂▂╱┈▕▂▂▂▏
▉▉▉▉▉┈┈┈▕▂▂▂▏
▉▉▉▉▉┈┈┈▕▂▂▂▏
▔▔▔▔▔▔╲▂▕▂▂▂
But that, like socialism itself, is an evil ideal.
You have to ask the follow-up question...
"Are you a National Socialist or an International Socialist?"
Go ahead, Earnest Prole, and provide the evidence that conservatives had any part of Social Security's creation.
Bowing to the wishes of a majority for political purposes I might grant if every effort to reform Social Security so that it will not - inevitably - bankrupt the country had not been introduced by Republicans.
The Gallup pole is nothing more than a snapshot on the quality of American education. We did not need their pole to give us the bad news. We can simply listen to our graduates.
The astonishing thing is that there is a live-action lesson on Socialism going on now for all to see and read about. It's not something from ancient history like, say...the 1960's. It's now.
And they still don't know what it is. They still think they could do it better. That's it's never been done correctly. The reality is that it's been done correctly for over a century. It's done exactly as it's supposed to be done. The result has been millions exterminated. Entire cultures decimated. Generations wiped out.
But, hey...vote for Bernie.
There were five of us in our family. Every so often there would be only four potatoes. Nobody was ever late for dinner.
"Are you a National Socialist or an International Socialist?"
Intergalactic Socialist. Even though they can't tell, everyone gets the same amount of dark matter.
The biggest and most fundamental problem with socialism is that it ignores human nature. Kinda like our Cookie.
I've never sat at a table where someone orders for everyone
Ha. Nope. They would be wearing whatever they ordered for me. How rude.
Even though socialism is an atheist philosophy, it often strikes me as a religion-substitute.
Socialists are hostile to greed (in other people). They want to punish (other) people for being greedy. In the socialist worldview, having money is proof of your greed. Thus, anybody who is rich is bad, and they must be destroyed.
People in the government are presumed to be non-greedy. How dare you call us greedy! We're (rich) servants who serve the people.
Then socialists create a hell on earth where everybody is punished for their greed. Except those pure servants in the government.
(See also Islam, which also hates greed, and doubles down with an attack on lust).
The socialist hatred of greed is a war on sin.
The USA is a far happier society because we tolerate sins like greed and lust. We know they are bad, and you should avoid being greedy, or lustful. But we don't attempt to punish people for their greed or their lust. We let God worry about your spiritual sins. We just focus on punishing people for crimes they do.
And they still don't know what it is. They still think they could do it better.
Not really. Fen's Law. The Marxists don't give a damn about equality, it's about power.
"There is the bully who orders for the entire table . . . If in other realms it is prudent to share"
An implicit gaffe here, revealing the actual lefty mindset: a bully ordering for everyone is a form of "sharing."
The biggest beneficiary of US Socialism are red state Trump whores.
For the love of god, Althouse, how do keep finding these articles about people in situations I've never heard of, never mind experienced?
I dine out frequently, most often with customers and coworkers. The only things that are usually ordered for the table/group, always by the person hosting (and paying for) the event, are wine and appetizers. This is almost always done by discussion of likes & dislikes. The wine ordering has a practical angle too - the person paying is best for choosing the wine given the wide range of bottle prices.
A bit off topic: one of my sisters visited over the weekend. She adheres to a vegan diet but makes it easy for us to accommodate by picking up some key food items she prefers that she knows we don't stock in our house. This weekend she explained that she is a vegan for health reasons (following a cancer diagnosis and surgery), not political, animal welfare reasons. She also said that she no longer engages with other vegan people on line or in person. Seems most of the folks she was coming in contact with are political vegans and become very upset with her when she reveals she only cares about the health benefits.
As Larry J says, "There are people who see everything through a political prism. Those people are known as assholes. Leave me the fuck alone and keep your politics to yourself."
Mockturtle,
Right. The poll is bullshit. “Counting existing welfare programs as socialism, do you favor at least some form of socialism?” Is a skewed question.
Howard, like Earnest Prole, has problems with definitions of words.
I was always blessed with the dubious ability to eat boiling hot pizza faster than anyone I knew. I didn't mind the burned little pieces of flesh in my mouth.
Anyhow, when we bought a pizza together, I would tend to suggest that we do this like Americans, not like commies: whoever eats fastest gets the most pizza...
Even though socialism is an atheist philosophy
No it's not.
it often strikes me as a religion-substitute.
At our Religion Substitute Cult Meetings (held every other Thor's Day in Mom's basement at 6:66 pm) we have a shrine to Milton Friedman, and everyone breathes homeopathic Church Air which could possibly contain several molecules that were exhaled by The Great One.
Then we put on funny hats and sing.
For the love of god, Althouse, how do keep finding these articles about people in situations I've never heard of, never mind experienced?
Reposting NYT trolling
Howard, like Earnest Prole, has problems with definitions of words.
Fair enough: Social Security is socialism. How many commenters are in favor of abolishing it?
When it goes bankrupt, will it be abolished?
Social Security takes money from younger, browner people who don’t vote and gives it to older, whiter people who do, but by all means show me the political plan for reversing that.
"Everyone is a socialist in their own family."
Or when doing things with co-workers or neighbors. Or when serving on the PTA of your kid's school. Or when driving in heavy traffic. Or when...oh, fuck it. Soller's attempt to make the prosaic political is retarded.
Kate Millett asserted that sex is political. She was either doing it wrong or with the wrong person.
At least at that dinner everyone was grabbing the food, they'd be worth cooking for. Try to reconcile paleos and vegans with a side of socialist commenting on cultural appropriation and eating local. (Eating local in Wisconsin is beets and snow for most of the year.) And a band of silent Trumpsters enjoying everything they eat but for them the conversation is poison.
But that, like socialism itself, is an impure ideal, as it’s impossible to get through a shared supper without someone (or everyone) feeling like an autocrat: There is the bully who orders for the entire table, the allergy sufferer who regrets forcing her sensitivities upon friends, the hungry person who snags the last lobster ravioli and is then filled with shame.
This is one sentence?
I guess the NYT editors were too busy reading the article about the 5 impeachable things Trump did.
The personal pan pizza is political.
There are people who see everything through a political prism. Those people are known as assholes. Leave me the fuck alone and keep your politics to yourself.
Bears repeating.
"Four in 10 Americans are stupid." (FIFY)
Somebody above probably already said it, but it bears repeating. Four in ten Americans are idiots.
Earnest Prole regularly demonstrates he is part of that 40%.
Words are tricky things.
I deny that Earnest Prole is their master.
Polling is FUN!
“Counting warm from the oven chocolate chip cookies as socialism, do you favor at least some form of socialism?” Is a skewed question... But one that most would favor! mmmm cookies!
It's magic! Socialism makes food disappear!
Little late to the party here, but...that alleged poll on socialism...looking at the demos, yeah, especially the age demo, youngin's tend to view socialism more favorably. 18-34's ranked high in this area. 35-54 saw a steep drop, then dropped further 55+. Churchill was right.
Shows to go ya...when you have nothing, you expect you can demand everything. When you have what at least you need, you don't want no one takin' nuttin'.
I come from a family with six kids. We learned that one kid got to cut the cake, and the other five then chose their slices before that one, in order that all cake cutting be done fairly. Micrometers would be required to find any differences in some of those kid-cut cake slices.
I am also sure this exercise of an individual versus the mob entertained my parents no end.
Family socialism? Only with large bowls of popcorn, where "to each according to our desire" could be accommodated without regard to need or ability.
Post a Comment