I’ve had several thoughts on politics in rotisserie for the past few years and months, and the Professor’s post inspired me to finally get some of then down on paper. This is one:
America is all about the fusing of things that are seemingly anathema. Different races, religions, and cultures all come together to make something stronger than the original. I bring this up because of the frequent “Obama is a communist” and “this nation is becoming socialist” comments. Leaving aside the obvious issues, statements like these presuppose a kind of ‘either/or’ world view. It kind of makes you picture Marx and Smith on a see-saw and America is the little guy trying to balance in the middle. “Oh no John! Don’t let Karl stay up too long! We’ll all turn commie!” Meanwhile, Karl is maneuvering for a surprise cherry bomb. Remember those? I digress.
Lazy thinking tends to lean toward false dichotomies. Polarizers keep insisting on capitalism or communism, liberal or conservative. It reminds me of a debate I read about once: there was this group of people that couldn’t decide whether they wanted a monarchy or a democracy. Eventually they realized that each system had its weaknesses, so they created a government with 3 branches – one similar to a monarchy, another to a republic, and the last to a democracy. That way, they overlapped each system’s weakness with another’s strength.
Of course, they wanted results. They didn’t have the luxury of becoming permanently entrenched in debate as a twisted form of entertainment. It seems like they know that a “my way or the highway” attitude tends to yield nothing.
When did we cease to be innovators? Isn’t that part of what made America great? We didn’t invent the mill, but damned if we didn’t improve on the design (after, you know, a little ole fashioned patriotic corporate espionage). We adapted many different political philosophies into a working government, we innovated our industry to become a power house; what is it about their child (economic policy) that makes us hold it so immutable?
I understand that our parents (and, frankly, 70% of those in charge of the country) grew up in a time where “communist” was today’s “terrorist,” where children had air raid drills instead of anthrax scares. And, with every crouch under the desk, a hatred of the Reds sank deeper into their marrow. I understand that this is why so much political debate right now is so polarized; we’re still riding the decades-old wave of fear to the shore.
I get it. The Child Catcher, Gollum, and slightly-oversized leprechauns will make me sweat no matter how old I get. But it’s time we grow up and stop being afraid of the dark – especially for those whose job it is to make decisions about our nation’s future.
“But communism is un-American.” That’s true… Granted, it’s as true as saying “Democracy is un-American.” In their pure forms, neither particularly resembles the way our nation is (or should be) governed.
Also, it’s time to visit the little house on Disambiguation Corner. Like most political jargon, the term “un-American” has an almost supernatural combination of vagueness and emotional charge.
What does “American” even mean? Does it mean “what America has done in the past?” Does it mean “consummate with the spirit behind the founding of America?” Everyone means something different when they say it, but expects their maxims to be accepted universally. Granted, this is how language works in general, but political buzzwords take it to a new level.
“But look at Russia. Look what communism did there!” There are two points here. The first is that we’re talking about innovation, not revolution. The second cannot be stated enough: just because something didn’t work hardly means it never works. When an experiment fails, you adjust something and try again.
Is America timeless because it never changed? Or is it timeless because of its ability to adapt? Is it even timeless at all?
The founders understood self-governance to be an ongoing experiment. If not, the union would have long dissolved because John Q. Founder refused to scrap the Articles of Confederation (the current constitution is a second attempt, remember?). The constitution is fluid (well, maybe plasmic) so we can continue to tweak variables in the spirit of self-governance, to incorporate and synthesize ideas that we haven’t tried yet. There is good in every system, there is bad in every system. If the tools you’ve been using keep failing to fix a problem, you add new tools to the kit. There’s security in diversifying.