If you've posted in forums you might remember writing some decent responses. I usually spend a lot of time polishing my discussion forum responses depending on the subject or who I am talking to. Often I want to remember what I said about something, but finding the original post can be difficult. So it makes sense to capture the better responses for later review. Welcome to Clint's Reposts.Wednesday, November 03, 2004
Proactive or Reactive toward Bush?
Tao wrote:
There is a cultural divide in this country and I am afraid that I am on the wrong side of where the voters want to go. To tell you the truth, I am frightened at what the next four years will bring.
Regarding the cultural divide aspect, I'm curious as to what you, and Jobey, Bernie, and some others or similar persuasion think of David Warren's take on this issue (http://www.davidwarrenonline.com/SunSpec/Oct04/index146.shtml):
The manners, mores, and rhetoric of Mr. Kerry resonate with the more liberal and urban America of the edges. (You see these constituencies in a glance at the red/blue distribution on a map of the states; it becomes clearer still when the map is further subdivided into counties.) And this America does not love Kerry. It hates Bush.
These are two Americas, with much still in common, but more and more not in common. Middle America remains frankly and overwhelmingly Christian; "Edge America" has lost its faith. Or rather, since humans cannot live without faith in something, Edge America has transferred its faith to hopes and ideals of worldly comfort. And whereas Middle America continues, in the main, to be self-reliant, and counsel self-reliance, Edge America turns to government to manage the problems of post-modern, urban, secular life.
Middle America believes the moral verities do not change; Edge America believes they evolve, and what was true yesterday can't be true tomorrow. It is allergic to moral certainties; it associates these with stupidity. And yet it has a kind of absolute and uncritical faith in its own moral relativism.
I'm not convinced that the voters want to "go" anywhere as you describe, but I, for one, agree that Christian religion as we've grown to know it in our lifetime is on the way out, to be replaced by something less tribal and perhaps more individually experienced. I also agree that Edge America exists, is generally non-religious, and does in fact turn to government to manage its problems. I think Warren was a bit too harsh on his Edge America analysis, but it is plain as an election map that there are two cultures.
So let me ask you, did you love Kerry or hate Bush? Did you really think Kerry was a viable answer to Bush, or did you just want Bush gone? Where you proactive or reactive?
The Republican mindset, not that they enact this at all well politically, is that each individual should pull themselves up by their own bootstraps. The Dems believe in a more socially conscious, let's help each other, aspect. There seems something akin to a generation gap between these two ideals. Such a gap was especially acute this election.
Clint
There is a cultural divide in this country and I am afraid that I am on the wrong side of where the voters want to go. To tell you the truth, I am frightened at what the next four years will bring.
Regarding the cultural divide aspect, I'm curious as to what you, and Jobey, Bernie, and some others or similar persuasion think of David Warren's take on this issue (http://www.davidwarrenonline.com/SunSpec/Oct04/index146.shtml):
The manners, mores, and rhetoric of Mr. Kerry resonate with the more liberal and urban America of the edges. (You see these constituencies in a glance at the red/blue distribution on a map of the states; it becomes clearer still when the map is further subdivided into counties.) And this America does not love Kerry. It hates Bush.
These are two Americas, with much still in common, but more and more not in common. Middle America remains frankly and overwhelmingly Christian; "Edge America" has lost its faith. Or rather, since humans cannot live without faith in something, Edge America has transferred its faith to hopes and ideals of worldly comfort. And whereas Middle America continues, in the main, to be self-reliant, and counsel self-reliance, Edge America turns to government to manage the problems of post-modern, urban, secular life.
Middle America believes the moral verities do not change; Edge America believes they evolve, and what was true yesterday can't be true tomorrow. It is allergic to moral certainties; it associates these with stupidity. And yet it has a kind of absolute and uncritical faith in its own moral relativism.
I'm not convinced that the voters want to "go" anywhere as you describe, but I, for one, agree that Christian religion as we've grown to know it in our lifetime is on the way out, to be replaced by something less tribal and perhaps more individually experienced. I also agree that Edge America exists, is generally non-religious, and does in fact turn to government to manage its problems. I think Warren was a bit too harsh on his Edge America analysis, but it is plain as an election map that there are two cultures.
So let me ask you, did you love Kerry or hate Bush? Did you really think Kerry was a viable answer to Bush, or did you just want Bush gone? Where you proactive or reactive?
The Republican mindset, not that they enact this at all well politically, is that each individual should pull themselves up by their own bootstraps. The Dems believe in a more socially conscious, let's help each other, aspect. There seems something akin to a generation gap between these two ideals. Such a gap was especially acute this election.
Clint
Post a Comment
Comments:
The best part about Bush is that not only does he create a climate of fear but he also tells us he is the remedy for that climate of fear. How long are we supposed to keep feeling afraid, just until we vote for him and then we feel safe again? I'm totally confused how this works....
