inspiration -vs- fear
September 4th, 2008 | Published in general | 4 Comments
I spent part of yesterday listening to some of the key speeches from the Democratic national convention. They’re posted at the WNYC website, a good reference. They also have a collected page of the Republican speeches available. After listening to a day of Democratic speeches, the overwhelming impression was that of optimism, of the possibilities inherent in our ingenuity and boundless energy. There were ideas such as an Americorps-like service to allow students to earn their way through college, talk of tax breaks and job growth at home. Big ideas and a willingness to jump in and work for them, the sort of feeling that i imagine Kennedy inspired in his campaign speeches.
Then, when i got home later that night, i listened to the Rudolph Giuliani speech live on the radio and got pissed off. There were blatant lies and comical simplifications, parroting the old saw about Democrat’s tax & spend policies and the call for smaller government, as if GW Bush hadn’t overseen the largest government expansion since the WPA. Much worse than the lying though, was the fear mongering. Giuliani brought the fear of terrorists right up to everyone’s doorstep, amplified the echoes of 9/11 and the (never-ending, fruitless) manhunt for Bin Laden. The Republicans weren’t preaching hope, they were preaching fear, and the crowd ate it up. John McCain, according to Giuliani, is the benevolent father for our country who will keep the wolves at bay and protect our Way of Life. The sheep in the hall baa’d yes! They desperately want a shepherd to tend them. We can’t build a peaceful and fruitful society on fear.
One other aspect of the speech nagged at me, but i couldn’t put my finger on it until reading Rushkoff’s essay today. It’s the idea of centralization. The very party who publicly rails against big-government, yet ironically champions the NRA and the right to personal armament, is quietly expanding their influence in the name of our protection. That expansion is coming at the direct expense of our personal rights and liberties. If the NRA wasn’t so firmly embedded in the Republican party, they would be seen as a dangerous outlier, ready to help arm the “Angry Left” against the government and their corporate contractors who are only “acting in our best interest”. It doesn’t seem like such a stretch, given the recent arc of government reach, that it would be the Republicans pushing for gun control and even more checkpoints than at schools and airports. For our convenience, of course.
The thesis that the Republicans are afraid of local organizing and neighborhood groups strikes me as very very true. They’re most comfortable placing these things in the hands of experts, and it’s not hard to imagine a day when community gatherings are frowned upon as suspicious and potentially dangerous. Whereas the Democratic speeches were built on a platform of unity (for the party and country both), the Republican speeches felt isolationist and wary. They’ve already set the precedent for pre-emptive interference with other countries, and against protesters at their own convention.
The way to build a better world is to get to know your neighbors, make friends, work together to fix what’s wrong. Think about the big picture, and not just your own backyard. Honor the sacrifice our soldiers are making, whether you agree with the war or not, by conserving our energy resources. Hold a door open for a stranger. Smile at someone random today. And, of course, ride a bike! (it makes that smiling thing automatic)
September 4th, 2008 at 9:30 pm (#)
Well spoken, sir.
September 4th, 2008 at 10:40 pm (#)
Lately, a lot of customers and others have been talking politics with me. I usually just smile and nod and make noncommittal statements that come off as agreeable. Anyway, what strikes me is that adherents to any party-line tend to view their own party’s rhetoric as positive (inspirational) and the opposing party’s as negative (fear-mongering, pessimism, etc).
I’d suggest that both national parties are generally reluctant to allow much power to trickle down into local grassroots groups and community enterprises. Both parties are essentially the same in that they support a strong and influential central government and distrust fragmentation/localization of power and responsibility that may lead to scary “patchwork” systems of governance.
September 7th, 2008 at 6:27 pm (#)
I agree with the tendency to attach positive adjectives to those we agree with, but there were several direct, literal references to the republican’s ability to protect the American people against the various specific and non-specific threats they saw. The republicans have been using words of conquest and domination where the democrats have stressed diplomacy.
It’s true that both parties are strongly invested in the continuation of a strong government, but it’s hypocritical of the republicans to claim to do so much to shrink government while they’re so actively expanding it.
September 16th, 2008 at 2:21 pm (#)
The Rebuplican dismissal of community organizers says it all.