Meta-bloggery

Mary's blog about bureaucrats turning red tape into straitjackets has seen the comments taking an unexpected turn or two (my previous comment [7 April, Even sheep ...] provoked one commenter to accuse me of "synthetic rage"). I continued the discussion.

http://timesonline.typepad.com/dons_life/2010/04/why-good-practice-can-ruin-good-practice.html#

My earlier comments provoked some response, to which I responded with a "meta-comment":

James Smith writes: "And Xjy, why are so many of your comments about class conflict? I respect your political/sociological views, but is this really the place to expound your theories?"
This is really the place (a good place), James, and I'm not trying to expound anything.
Mary's being considered for the Orwell prize - for political writing! She's even labelled as "subversive" in the blog blurb. Those are establishment invitations to politically "subversive" comments. Num?
However, there is a real political and sociological perspective to Mary's reflections. How do state decisions (via the government and its bureaucracy) affect the acquisition, sharing and passing on of knowledge essential to a good society? This present blog is an example. Comments on the root of these decisions are relevant. If the comments are "outside the box", that's more a reflection on the box than the comments. Do I have to remind everyone that even Reader's Digest has been banging on for decades about the importance of dissident thought to creativity and progress? And if a reactionary US Republican rag does it, why shouldn't an educated and cultured bloghood welcome it? Diversity, stimulation? At my breadmill our last kick-off gave us a whole day of "creativity
I haven't been accused of corrupting youth - yet - though Mary has raised this spectre in blogs about state vetting of anyone with contact with kids. Censorship and paranoia are recurring themes in the blog. Gadflies sting. Hemlock, anyone?
"Here I stand; I can do no other. God help me."
"Dixi et salvavi animam meam."
Of course, if my "rage" is only "synthetic" instead of synthesizing, as Anthony A maintains, then it's Thersites bitching or Diogenes showboating naked in his barrel rather than Socrates or Luther. But hell, rather that and my own place in Hell than wafting about on the banks of the Styx.
A bit of meta-bloggery shouldn't be too out of place now and then, either, innit?