Random Blogging – Page 334

Defining Our Terms

On Mondays, I receive an emailed essay called Sightings from Martin Marty, the eminent University of Chicago religion scholar who distributes his observations and those of others studying or teaching at the University’s Divinity School. This morning, he wrote about a recent article from the Economist on Jews and Israel.

The general discussion was interesting, but the following paragraph struck me:

The editors see reactionary Orthdoxies still winning over moderate movements. No surprise here. In the six-year five-fat-volume study of militant fundamentalisms I co-directed (with R. Scott Appleby) for the American Academy of Arts and Sciences,we found everywhere, in all religions, that it was not conservatism that was growing but extremism based less in history-based traditions but in fear, reaction, and aggression. As I read the Economist and other such literature I think of an observation by Harold Isaacs which we paraphrased as we looked at Muslim, Jewish, Hindu, Christian and other militancies: “Around the world there is a massive convulsive ingathering of peoples into their separatenesses and over-againstnesses to protect their pride and power and place from the real or presumed threat of others who are doing the same.

I think that’s a perceptive observation, and it applies to more than religious identity.

In America, in our zeal to label rather than understand, we have seen contemporary radicalism confused with genuine conservatism. We have failed to distinguish between patriotism and nationalism. And we have seen “We the People” redefined to exclude “others”–immigrants, GLBT folks, Muslims, “elitists,” even Southerners. We seem to be growing a variety of fundamentalisms.

Fear, reaction and aggression, leading to extremism and an “us versus them” worldview. Sort of sums up contemporary politics, doesn’t it?

This impulse to label and reject those who do not share our identity may be understandable, but it is deeply corrosive, and it distracts us from the discussions we need to conduct. Distinguishing between mainstream conservatism and liberalism and their extremist manifestations–accurately defining our terms–might be a first step back toward sanity.

Comments

The Art of the Dog Whistle

Poor Mitt Romney. He’s wooden and inauthentic on the campaign trail, and yesterday, his attempt at a ‘dog whistle’ to those uncomfortable with Obama’s “otherness” simply betrayed his very curious lack of self-awareness.

A ‘dog whistle,’ for those unfamiliar with the phrase, is use of language and/or allusions that send a message to a targeted constituency without communicating that message to the public at large. George W. Bush was a master at it: he would use biblical phrases that were familiar and meaningful to evangelical Christians but unfamiliar to most of us to send a signal that he was one of them–without alerting anyone who might have a problem with so explicit a declaration of faith.

In an interview with Larry Kudlow yesterday, Mitt “went there” by opining that Obama’s beliefs are “foreign to American experience.”

Mitt, Mitt, Mitt. This might work if you were one of the dramatically declining number of Americans living the life of Opie in Mayberry, but in case you hadn’t noticed, your beliefs and experiences aren’t exactly part and parcel of the “American experience”–whatever that means these days.

Very few Americans are married to someone who drives “a couple of Cadillacs.” Fewer still claim a tax deduction of 77,000 for upkeep of their “dressage” Olympic horse, or install car elevators in one of their multiple homes.

Your devotion to your church probably does reflect American religiosity, but most denominations don’t share a belief that Jesus visited the continental U.S. after he rose from the dead, or that his visit and further instructions were inscribed on gold plates that were subsequently discovered buried in Palmyra, New York.

Let’s face it: neither you nor President Obama are typical Americans. Obama is a member of a racial minority; you are a member of a religious minority. You grew up privileged, he spent a good part of his childhood abroad. In both cases, your experiences have shaped who you are. In neither case have your atypical backgrounds made you “foreign” to the American experience. Both of you are part of the increasingly diverse fabric of this country.

Dog whistles only work when you are clearly a member of the group you are signaling–and the other guy just as clearly isn’t.

Comments

Southern Electioneering

The other day, I mentioned how few bumper stickers I’ve seen this election season. That observation has held as we have driven south, through Kentucky, Tennessee, and the Carolinas.

As every academic knows, you can’t draw valid conclusions from an inadequate sample. But a couple of the things I have seen are consistent with a theory–espoused by several pundits and even by John Boehner–that this election is all about Obama. (Boehner, you may recall, was asked by a voter for a reason to like Mitt Romney. Boehner basically responded that it wasn’t’ necessary to like Romney–it was enough to loathe Obama.)

On our drive, we’ve seen signs for a Congressional candidate promising to “Stop Obama Now.” And we’ve seen a couple of “NoBama” bumper stickers. That’s it. Not a single pro-Romney sign or sticker, and very few pro-Obama ones.

To some extent, of course, every election featuring an incumbent is a referendum on that incumbent, but in this election, that truism is super-charged by the incumbent’s complexion. I was stunned by the intense hatred of Obama that emerged the day after the election–well before he was inaugurated, before he had done anything. The emergence of the “birthers,” the crazies who insist he was really born in Kenya, that he’s really a Muslim (with a radical Christian pastor!)–all efforts to avoid using the “n” word–are hard to miss. But it isn’t only the obvious racists. There are a lot of people who are simply uncomfortable with a black President.

Is it possible to simply disagree with Obama’s policy choices? Of course. Will many people vote for Romney because they are good Republicans, because they don’t like the direction the President wants to take the country? Of course. To suggest that all or even most opposition to the President is racist would be ridiculous–just as denying the substantial racism that does exist would be ridiculous.

One way or the other, the “referendum effect” will be particularly potent this year, because as John Boehner conceded, it’s hard to actually like Mitt Romney.

Comments

A Walk on the Beach

The two youngest grandchildren, 8 and 10, are with us at the beach (this time, thankfully, with their parents). Both were eager to begin the week with something that has become a ritual–a half-mile walk down the beach to the Inn and across the lobby to the newspaper dispensers, where we buy the local papers before walking back.

The sun was hitting the ocean, the beach was pristine. Other walkers nodded and smiled. The kids ran in and out of the water’s edge. My grandson remarked that his dad had told him that he and his 2 brothers used to sleep in the room he and his sister were now occupying, and that one of them had to sleep on the floor. (Two beds, three boys.) I laughed and said “I guess I had too many children,” to which he responded, seriously. “That must have been hard on you.”

There is something about family traditions that span generations. And since I am nerd to the core, I looked at my grandchildren and the beach and the ocean, and wondered if vacations like this one will be possible when they have grandchildren.

Will the climate change deniers–the dolts and the economically-motivated and the “we’re going to be Raptured anyway” believers–stop policymakers from taking the steps necessary to protect the planet from further environmental degradation? Is my generation so selfish that we won’t agree to some relatively minor inconveniences now in order to preserve mountains and beaches for the generations to come?

Corny as it is, I couldn’t help remembering a poem my own mother used to recite to me. The stanza I remember: “Lives of great men all remind us we can make our lives sublime, and departing, leave behind us, footprints on the sands of time.”

Footprints, hell. I just hope we leave some sand.

Comments

Observations and Aggravations

We drove for 11 hours yesterday, ending in Charlotte, NC. We got in around dinner, so didn’t get to see much of the downtown area; what we did see looks vibrant and very “happening,” however. After we walk around today, I’ll have more firm impressions to share.

We stopped in Charlotte on our way to the beach, because the city has taxed itself (I know–amazing, isn’t it!) to provide public transit, and we wanted to see that transportation system. (If you’re a regular reader of this blog, the nerd-iness of that won’t surprise you.) More on that, too, tomorrow.

Three brief observations from the road:

The 2012 campaign is in full swing, but I have seen very few bumper stickers this cycle–certainly, far fewer than at this time in 2008. Interestingly, the few I have seen have seen have all been Obama stickers; I have yet to see a single Romney one. My very unscientific conclusion from this is that this is a low-enthusiasm election across the board, but what enthusiasm there is seems to favor Obama.

We hit a construction site on I75, between Jellico and Lake City, Tennessee. Signs for miles ahead warned that the right lane would be closed. Most drivers (including this one) dutifully migrated into the left lane, but there were plenty of jerks who sped up in the right lane in order to pass the line and then “merge” at the point where that lane was blocked. We’ve all seen this sort of rude behavior, some people’s willingness to make the delay much longer for everyone else in order to gain a few minutes advantage for themselves. As I sat there fuming at them (they all seemed to drive SUVs, too…), it occurred to me that I was seeing a metaphor for humanity: you have the folks who play by the rules and the ones who think the rules (legal and moral alike) are for suckers. (OK, maybe I’m drawing an excessive lesson from a traffic incident, but we sat there for at least 45 minutes…)

Finally, someone on the radio was relaying the results of a poll. The question: does government do too much or too little? I didn’t hear the result, but the poll itself is a great example of Americans’ addiction to useless, idiot polling. The question itself is meaningless, just like our endless debates over “big” government vs. “small” government. The question is: what should government do, not how much. (There’s significant research showing that people who bitch about government doing “too much” are the first to scream bloody murder when services are curtailed. It’s sort of like those pious folks who love humanity but hate all their neighbors.)

If this post sounds grumpy, I did drive 11 hours yesterday….

Comments