« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
Not In Our Stars
Cassius:
"The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, But in ourselves, that we are underlings."
Julius Caesar (I, ii, 140-141)
Fate did not put GW Bush in the White House. The voters did, together with an ideologically partisan Supreme Court, and a few election anomalies, here and there, to which the public seems relatively indifferent. But if enough voters had voted against him, in two elections, Bush would not be in the White House. That should be patently obvious. What settled the affairs? Earth tones? Wind surfing? My turn? Cheney's daughter?
Did the voters understand that Bush, and the cabal of which he is the visible avatar--fundamentally believed no good can come of government? Did they understand what that philophy might mean in terms of recruiting for government agencies, policing government contracts, disaster recovery, and prosecutorial discretion? I do not remember any public debates about these issues during either of the last two elections. I do not remember debates about war without end, demonizing the Russians, corporate welfare, peak oil, the death of the reef system, or the collapse of marine environments.
The countless wicked problems that we now face were NOT part of the electoral discussion. Yes, there was talk about Iraq and the 'War on Terror'(a nonsense phrase)--but never a discussion about how we would know if the policy was working, how long we should stick with it until we need to review it, and any other alternative to the status quo.
Once again, we have reached that moment when voters will determine the course of the next 4 years, and are we discussing the appropriate role of Government in regulating financial markets, international trade, increasing consumer protections, environmental protections and other profoundly serious issues that must be addressed? No. We are talking about 'judgement' and 'experience' and 'celebrity' and 'war stories' and 'lapel flags' and 'patriotism'. Does the public have any idea what policies either of these candidates would support to curtail the manipulation of commodities markets by foreign government funds? Or what to do about Social Security? Or the outsourcing of labor? Or global warming? Or any of the dozens of wicked problems with with we are currently freighted? Not really. I might imagine, with Obama. I have a reasonable sense of what to expect from McCain(preserve the status quo). But, once again, we seem to be voting for a Prom King. And I don't hear the voters protesting much. Oh, maybe, "I've heard too much about Obama." However this plays out, the buck stops with the voter. It is not in the stars, the hands of the Divine, or a simple twist of fate. It is down to US.
Advertisement








Comments (3)
"The voters did, together with an ideologically partisan Supreme Court, and a few election anomalies, here and there, to which the public seems relatively indifferent." A few election anomolies? I'm sorry, you need to research that a bit more.
August 20, 2008 1:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm familiar with all the literature on Fl and Ohio from the 2000 and 2004 elections. It's an ancient rhetorical technique:
understatement, atenuación, or meiosis (the opposite of hyperbole, often for ironic effect -- "Un golpe de ataúd en tierra es algo perfectamente serio");
August 20, 2008 1:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's still wrong., factually.
August 20, 2008 4:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment