cities. physics. food. environment. fatherhood.
Random header image... Refresh for more!

The political zodiac

Progressives in this country proudly refer to themselves as being a part of the “reality-based community,” a play on a quip that apparently came from the current White House. I think there’s a deep sense in which this notion resonates, about progressive ideas in general, but that’s not what this post is about. Progressives need to play the part of being members of the reality-based community, and that means rejecting all intellectually bankrupt notions, and not just the conservative ones.

It irks me, then, when I hear fellow progressives take astrology seriously. I don’t want to take the time here to explain in detail why it’s nonsense to think that the position of the Earth in its orbit around the Sun, when one is born, such that the Sun appears to be amongst a group of stars which are not necessarily anywhere near one another in real space but whose projections onto the celestial sphere are reasonably close, to be in one of twelve approximations to the thirteen regions of this sphere through which the plane of the ecliptic passes, can have anything to do with one’s personality. But rather, let’s look at a consequence if this notion were true.

If you want to believe that horoscopes have any meaning, then you have to accept the notion that there are inherent characteristics shared by all who have any particular sign. If you are said to have certain personality traits because you’re, say, a Capricorn, then it’s a trait you should be said to share with all other Capricorns. What we have are twelve equivalence classes, canonically labeled by the names of 12 constellations. But there’s no reason that these are the only names we could use for these groups. Why not just pick one representative member of each equivalence class? Remember, everyone in each group is supposed to share certain personality traits, so what you’re really doing is picking someone whose personality, by definition, is representative of everyone with that sign. Including, of course, people that you don’t like.

So for progressives, I give you the Political Zodiac. When a fellow progressive asks you what your sign is, reply with the appropriate name on this list, instead of the name of the constellation. Remember, the whole idea of astrology is that you have something in common with others of your sign: 

Aries Tom DeLay
Taurus John Ashcroft
Gemini George H. W. Bush
Cancer George W. Bush
Leo Alberto Gonzales
Virgo Bob Packwood
Libra Jesse Helms
Scorpio Pat Buchanan
Sagittarius Strom Thurmond
Capricorn Karl Rove
Aquarius Dick Cheney
Pisces Jack Abramoff

 

2 comments

1 Tojo { 01.17.08 at 5:05 am }

I’m a Virgo progressive and I’m guilty of Bob Packwood tendencies.

2 Commander Plaza { 01.18.08 at 2:40 pm }

Hey, I’m a Dick Cheney and my fiancee is a Tom DeLay. Now give me some damn candy.

Leave a Comment