Here's a good article from Michael Kinsley from the Nov. 7 LA Times.
I apologize for everything I believe in. May I go now?
Michael Kinsley
COMMENTARY
The election campaign made it official. These are the Disunited States.
There is "red America": conservative, Republican, religious. And there is
"blue America": liberal, Democratic, secular. Everybody's message from the
election results is that red America won, and blue America must change or
die.
It's a terrible exaggeration, of course. People have different mixes of
values, and states have different mixes of people. More than 50 million, or
44%, of the 115 million citizens who voted for either George W. Bush or John
F. Kerry on Tuesday live in states that went for the other guy. These
misfits go out in public, mingle with others and often are treated like
normal human beings. (For the half-million that voted for Ralph Nader, it
may be a different story.)
A moment of surprising resonance in the campaign was Jon Stewart's Oct. 15
appearance on "Crossfire." Taking just a tad too seriously his recent
appointment by acclamation as the Walter Cronkite of our time, Stewart
begged the show's hosts to "stop hurting America" with their divisiveness. I
used to work on that show, and I still think the robust, even raucous, and
ideologically undisguised hammering of politicians on "Crossfire" is more
intellectually honest than more decorous shows where journalists either
pretend neutrality or pontificate as if somebody had voted them into office.
Still, recognizing that the mood has changed since 9/11, I have been
erratically and unsuccessfully pitching a different approach. CNN is not
interested. Nor are the other news networks. If anyone reading this wants
it, it's yours. Free. The idea, in a word, "Cease-Fire." You get your
politicians or your experts or your interest-group representatives, and
instead of poking them with a stick to widen their disagreement, you nudge
and bully and cajole them toward some kind of common ground. It sounds
goody-goody, I know, but the intention would be more Judge Judy than Bill
Moyers.
At the moment, though, one side of the great divide is being called on for
something closer to abjection than mere reconciliation.
So yes, OK, fine. I'm a terrible person - barely a person at all, really,
and certainly not a real American - because I voted for the losing candidate
on Tuesday. If you insist - and you do - I will rethink my fundamental
beliefs from scratch because they are shared by only 47% of the electorate.
And please let me, or any other liberal, know if there is anything else we
can do to abase ourselves. Abandon our core values? Pander to yours? Not a
problem. Happy to do it. Anything, anything at all, to stop this shower of
helpful advice.
There's just one little request I have. If it's not too much trouble, of
course. Call me profoundly misguided if you want. Call me immoral if you
must. But could you please stop calling me arrogant and elitist?
I mean, look at it this way. (If you don't mind, that is.) It's true that
people on my side of the divide want to live in a society where women are
free to choose and where gay relationships have civil equality with straight
ones. And you want to live in a society where the opposite is true. These
are some of those conflicting values everyone is talking about. But at least
my values - as deplorable as I'm sure they are - don't involve any direct
imposition on you. We don't want to force you to have an abortion or to
marry someone of the same sex, whereas you do want to close out those
possibilities for us. Which is more arrogant?
We on my side of the great divide don't, for the most part, believe that our
values are direct orders from God. We don't claim that they are immutable
and beyond argument. We are, if anything, crippled by reason and
open-mindedness, by a desire to persuade rather than insist. Which
philosophy is more elitist? Which is more contemptuous of people who
disagree?
As many conservative voices have noted, American society suffers from a cult
of grievance. To put it crudely, everyone wants some of the things blacks
got from the civil rights movement: sympathy, publicity, occasional
preferential treatment and a general ability to put everybody else on the
defensive. No doubt liberals are responsible for this deplorable situation,
and I apologize. Again. As a softheaded liberal, I even like the idea that
our competitive culture has a built-in consolation prize.
But be fair! (A liberal whine, I know. Sorry.) Conservatives shouldn't
assert the prerogatives of victory and then claim the compensations of
defeat as well. You can't oppress us and simultaneously complain that we are
oppressing you.
Well, of course you can do this, if you want. Who's to stop you? I just
kinda wish you wouldn't. If you don't mind my asking. Thanks. Sorry.
No comments:
Post a Comment