Wednesday, April 30, 2008
Youthful passion is really quite tedious
We are moving into the new house this week, and I spent part of the morning consolidating some memorabilia into a carton so that it would end up in the right place. I came across letters of mine to the Des Moines Register back in the 1970s, which happened to coincide with my adolescence. They are hilarious, and will no doubt see the light of day on this blog at some point in the not-too-distant future. They reminded me that when Jimmy Carter beat Gerald Ford in 1976 -- the fall of my 10th grade year -- I was miserable for days. The only thing that saved me was that Jim Leach, for whom I had volunteered many hours in September and October, beat "Fast Eddie" Mezvinsky to win a seat in Congress. I was passionate about politics back then, meaning that I could work up a lot of joy or rage over politicians and elections.
Naturally, then, this letter from one of Andrew Sullivan's readers reminded me of my youth:
I'll just put that out there. If Obama is done in by this whole Wright thing I am done with politics. I can't invest myself in something that is so sure to disappoint me time and time and time again...
Yeah, well, that's a pretty adolescent view of politics in a robust democracy. If your answer to losing is to declare yourself "done with politics," then you don't really have the stamina necessary to be a participating citizen. Which is just as well. Democracy requires the continuing participation of the losers, and if you do not have the stones to play the game again the next time then you are part of the problem, not part of the solution. The sooner the passionate people get disappointed and leave the government up to those of us mature enough to recover from the agony of defeat, the closer we will be to substituting casual, fun-loving partisanship for the bitter, spitting version that has dominated in the last 15 or 20 years.
Put differently, Andrew Sullivan evidently thinks it is a problem if his passionate correspondent drops out of politics, and I think we would be better off if he did. I yearn for the days when we could talk about politics over beers with people of the other wing and walk away looking forward to the next such conversation. All these passionate, easily-disappointed, thin-skinned people take all the fun out of democracy, and make the country much harder to govern besides. Good riddance to 'em.
32 Comments:
By 
, at
Wed Apr 30, 09:38:00 PM:
You need to post more on the country of Georgia. Seriously, it's interesting; do it.
By , at
Wed Apr 30, 10:59:00 PM:
All these passionate, easily-disappointed, thin-skinned people take all the fun out of democracy, and make the country much harder to govern besides.
I understand why you think they take the fun out of democracy when they walk away, but not how it makes the country harder to govern. Surely if one's opponents lay down their power (which is what getting out of politics equates to), then it becomes easier to govern.
By , at
Thu May 01, 12:29:00 AM:
Surely if one's opponents lay down their power (which is what getting out of politics equates to), then it becomes easier to govern.
I think Tigerhawk means that they make it harder to govern when they stay in politics, not when they leave.
By 
TigerHawk, at
Thu May 01, 05:31:00 AM:
Actually, to me this is not a partisan thing. I suppose there is plenty of passionate, thin-skinned behavior on the right. I don't see it, because I live in New Jersey and do not listen to talk radio, but one sees the footprints of it. Good riddance to them, too!
By , at
Thu May 01, 07:21:00 AM:
Sullivan really should take a longer look at why exactly he is disappointed so frequently. At some point he may realize the content of his ideas are really not appealing to the general public.
btw, can't wait to see the DMR letters; my folks did a fair amount of work for the Leach campaigns as well, watching a number of close calls before he finally got in.
By , at
Thu May 01, 07:40:00 AM:
I noticed these presumably young and naive opinion givers recently when people were leaving comments somewhere about the spike in violence on the south side of Chicago. There were many knee jerk comments blaming Bush (of course) for the recent spate of murders. The posters clearly had no historical perspective on this neighborhood or ones like it across the country. No real knowledge of the riots in the 60s and 70s; the effects of welfare policies on culture and social fabric; the crack epidemic in the 80s and 90s. Just no clue whatsoever. Amazing what you get to see with age.
By , at
Thu May 01, 07:45:00 AM:
Thickness of one's skin and the ability to question one's judgement (i.e, humility) go hand in hand.
By , at
Thu May 01, 07:53:00 AM:
the underlying assumption is that Andrew Sullivan's reader is not Andrew Sullivan himself.
By , at
Thu May 01, 08:19:00 AM:
"I suppose there is plenty of passionate, thin-skinned behavior on the right. I don't see it, because I live in New Jersey and do not listen to talk radio, but one sees the footprints of it. Good riddance to them, too!"
TH, if you don't listen to what they're saying on the radio, how do you know what they're like? I'm a HUGE talk radio listener and I"m dispassionately in for the long haul. The thing about us is we don't suddenly lose our principles when we lose an election.
Then again, Dems don't seem to have them in the first place, so I guess they don't lose them either.
By , at
Thu May 01, 08:24:00 AM:
Civility is nice but it is surely gone - and I mean like, really gone. Both parties have been thoroughly purged of their intellectuals and thinkers and what is left now is the mimes and the sycophants. Everybody has their talking points memorized so there is no need to worry about being creative or innovative. No, you want to go back to the good old days of political discourse but the whole rubric has changed. Intelligent people don't go into politics anymore, and why should they? The small minds are in power now and the peasants merely repeat their talking points as written in the NYT or seen on Bill O'Reilly, or even in... dare I say it...? Yes, even in a blog
By , at
Thu May 01, 08:42:00 AM:
The small mindedness, inflexibility, self-righteousness and inability to effect a political compromise have had there day in American politics before.
For example, the years leading up to the Civil War. The years of the Great Depression. I could go on.
Good riddance may be too kind, but they will be back with more fervor and stupidity.
Jim Leach was a good congressman. Were there a dozen like him in the House now.
-David
By , at
Thu May 01, 08:58:00 AM:
Well,this has been one of the symptoms and subsequent outcomes of the politics of a personality cult...all the followers of the 'childrens' crusade' get disillusioned when their candidate finally goes down the tubes and declare themselves out of the game for good whining that this is 'proof' that the system is terminally corrupt and beyond redemption...we can only hope that the doorknob doesn't hit them in their collective asses
Robbins Mitchell
Houston,Tx
By , at
Thu May 01, 09:26:00 AM:
This hits the nail squarely... I've lived in Canada since late '03 and recall the spate of whiners who declared they were heading up here after the Nov '04 Bush "coup." Have never seen any who actually followed through.
This isn't limited to adolescents. It's a pathology of the left and afflicts the middle-aged as well. I have never met a conservative or libertarian who declared, let alone acted upon, an intent to leave politics or the US in the wake of their candidate's defeat.
In fact, upon informing a close (lefty) relative that we're thrilled to be moving back the the US this summer, this person told me that "the US isn't all that great." When I asked why she would say something so preposterous my relative replied "well, the politics, for one."
I told her that I've lived around the world for the past 17 years and that fractious politics within a sacrosanct process is one of America's greatest virtues.
I can't wait to leave the somnolent, self-satisfied, clueless nation in which I currently live and return to my motherland with its abundant vitality.
By , at
Thu May 01, 09:27:00 AM:
Whenever I discuss politics with someone nowadays, I continually have to remind them, "Look, I don't hate you. I just think you're wrong."
By BBridges, at
Thu May 01, 09:56:00 AM:
It has always struck me that people who invest themselves so completely in a particular candidate, that obsess over particular issues, that burn with rage when things do not go their way, are the ones that burn out most often. It seems that the fiery, fanatical passion that they bring for that bright shining and idiotic moment is what brings them down.
On the other hand, people that recognize our political system as a series of compromises and efforts to get the best candidate possible in that particular moment, and appreciate the genius of that system, are able to live their lives pretty regularly without having all that passion stuff sap their energy.
By , at
Thu May 01, 10:31:00 AM:
I wouldn't take Sullivan's stated "political" motivation for his "disappointment" at face value. Let's not forget his very public, proud and oft-stated sexual orientation and...uhh, couple that with this "conservative's" recent over-the-top and breathless swoon for Obama. Leads me to believe he is a disappointed lover, not a disappointed political pundit. Doesn't make him a bad person, though.
By , at
Thu May 01, 10:32:00 AM:
Seeing as "passion" is emotion, not ratiocination, it's not all that surprising that passion poisons politics. It is by definition irrational.
By Andrew X, at
Thu May 01, 10:36:00 AM:
I'm trying to spread around what I have coined the 'seat-warmer theory' to see if it takes.
My theory, developed in a split-second as my brother proudly showed off the seat warmers in his new car, is simply this:
Our capitalist market culture, AND our social political culture, are jointly driven relentlessly and unceasingly to one end: the removal of ANY form of discomfort in our lives WHATSOEVER, and wherever it may be found. Be it physical discomfort, emotional, cultural... whatever. And most significantly, both market and culture consist of millions of people that are driven act to remove that "discomfort", even when it is not even themselves who are discomforted. They do it for "others" (so they think). Their wonderful fulfilled lives are about removing that "discomfort" from everyone else... not themselves.
The end result - An entire society of people categorically unable to deal with the fact that life is imperfect, difficult, problematic, and, dare I say, many times uncomfortable. Lost, maybe forever, are such things as stoicism, determination to overcome, and realism of outlook.
So when confronted with such things as the victory of an opposing party, the reaction is not, "well, time to buckle down, re-assess, and fight the next round", but rather the screams of a discomoforted child. "You CHEATED!.... I'm ENTITLED!.... SOMEONE has to be at fault!.... It's not FAIR!..... etc etc.
On these people's backs lie the survival of Western Civilization.
Sleep well tonight.
By GreenmanTim, at
Thu May 01, 10:45:00 AM:
"Intelligent people don't go into politics anymore, and why should they? The small minds are in power now and the peasants merely repeat their talking points..."
As I recall, Alexis de Tocqueville said much the same thing about the calibre of those who went into politics in the 1830s.
By , at
Thu May 01, 10:46:00 AM:
Good point, Druu, but with a minor tweak;
It's not the striving to REMOVE discomfort that is the problem; after all, that could be seen as the purpose of all life, as discomfort is a symptom of an unfulfilled need or an unmitigated risk.
It is the attempt to AVOID discomfort, to dodge paying the price for safety, security, advancement, that is truly our biggest societal flaw.
So, may it's not the "seatwarmer" theory, but the "FREE seatwarmer" theory?
Cheers,
By M. Simon, at
Thu May 01, 12:00:00 PM:
Speaking of the lack of historical memory:
What about the violence on the North Side of Chicago in the 1920s caused by the alcohol epidemic?
By Cassandra, at
Thu May 01, 12:02:00 PM:
Mon Dieu!
The unbearable ennui of youth! To have experienced such shattering disappointments! To be losing, so young, the purity and innocence of belief that politics, she is a pure and transcendent process that lifts us from the dreary and hopeless slough of despond and set us on the shining path to... to...
Aieeeee!!!! Nevermind. It was just a beautiful dream, an audacious hope. Alone are we, adrift in a universe bereft of a Supreme Being, a deontological belief system or most importantly, affordable health care.
Alas -- the thing that so nearly was, can never come to pass.
It is of the most heartbreaking, n'est pas?
By , at
Thu May 01, 12:33:00 PM:
And in tenth grade you wasted time writing letters to the Register why?! By then you had more education and good judgement than most of those reading the paper and certainly more than those working there. If ever a state were worst served by a paper i do not know of it!
By Charlottesvillain, at
Thu May 01, 12:55:00 PM:
anon 12:33:
Back then at least they had the Big Peach!
By , at
Thu May 01, 01:13:00 PM:
Actually, this petulance seems to be far more a thing of the Left than the Right because of their almost innate sense of moral and intellectual superiority and hence, feeling of entitlement to power and state services of all types leads them to not "question" themselves. The Leftists I know typically DON'T read to Right wing bloggers or authors, don't suscribe to our magazines, and don't listen to our talk show hosts (Rush being the only one I'd consider "intellectual").
So their opinions about life, the universe and everything is almost entirely created by their own organs - they are thus always stunned when culture or politics don't follow the script as when Reagan won his two landslide victories or the rise of the hugely young pro-life movement, the gun culture, NASCAR, and more.
Far from being "openminded" and "nonjudgmental" leftists - unlike Rightists who are forced to deal with them daily - are closeminded bigots with pre-made cliches and slogans in place of logical arguments. "It's my right to choose" offered with little thought for the principle of right being invoked (might=right), or "no blood for oil" as though oil was not the lifeblood of our entire economic/political system...and so on.
Until more Democrats break out of their echo chamber I don't see how politics will be less polarized. I can calmly discuss their beliefs with them because I've thought them through....as an outsider. But they can't calmly discuss my views because they either don't know them at all, or only know their own twisted versions of them.
By BBridges, at
Thu May 01, 01:35:00 PM:
In my experience, including a conversation with a leftist friend last night, a key difference between that side of the political spectrum and the right is a belief that humans are somehow perfectable. That we can and should strive to reach for the next level in our evolution. If we only talked more then we would finally understand each other. If we gave everybody jobs then everybody would have jobs. That is the appeal of the Obama campaign, it promises that dream.
In my worldview, humans are and will always be imperfect and our policies should always have that reality in mind. Some people love the opportunity to talk so they can get close enough to slip a blade through your ribs and some people will never show up to any job they are given.
Evolution is over. Get over it.
By M. Simon, at
Thu May 01, 02:08:00 PM:
Evolution is hardly over. Given the right kind of stress IQ will rise about 1 point a generation.
Hardly noticeable in the beginning. After 250 or 500 years people begin to notice.
By , at
Thu May 01, 02:35:00 PM:
The best comment on modern politics that I have heard:
"Anyone willing to put up with what is required to run for President of the United States is thereby disqualified."
By John Clifford, at
Thu May 01, 04:00:00 PM:
I, too, was in 10th grade when Carter defeated Ford, and I was depressed for weeks. However, with the perspective that three decades brings, I can look back on the Carter Administration and laugh, remembering ol' Jimmy the Slayer of Attacking Rabbits Who Consulted With Daughter Amy on Nuclear Strategy and Whose Energy Policy Consisted of Telling America to Wear a Sweater. Kind of like a bad "Hee Haw" rerun... except for the tremendous inflation and interest rates that cost many neighbors their homes, waiting in line for gas while I was a high school senior, and watching Americans being held hostage in Iran. What a breath of fresh air Reagan was!
The key thing I learned from Jimmy Carter was that America is greater than its president, and while we thrive under good leadership, we survive bad leadership.
I'm voting for McCain this fall, not because I'm especially fond of his policies (although I do have great respect for the man), but because looking at either Hillary or Obama makes the choice easy. The Democrat contenders are equal in their incompetence, ignorance, and hubris, and having either one as president is scary. However, one thing I know... America will be okay even if the Dems win. It will just be better if the grownups do.
By , at
Thu May 01, 04:10:00 PM:
Let's not forget another aspect of being young...the tendency to exaggerate. Remember all those actors who claimed they would move to France if Bush won? Put this guy in that category for a few more years...
By , at
Thu May 01, 04:33:00 PM:
Its been a long, long time since the days of Tip O'Neil and Daniel Patrick Moynihan.
Then again, its been a long time since we were "all in it together"
The present Democratic leaders and thinkers, unlike their forebears, were not "with us" during the cold war. That generation died with Tip and DPM. The new generation are '68ers, just continuing a decades long slash and burn campaign. On the Repub side you've got a talk radio generation that is probably not a whole lot better.
You would have thought that after 9/11 there would have been a moment of unity. And there was: a moment. But because there was no follow up. And because this administration has so successfully shifted the war theater back to the mideast where it belongs, most Americans can continue going on about complaining about their houses, which have lost value but are still 75% higher than they were in 2000.
By , at
Fri May 02, 09:29:00 PM:
Our capitalist market culture, AND our social political culture, are jointly driven relentlessly and unceasingly to one end: the removal of ANY form of discomfort in our lives WHATSOEVER, and wherever it may be found. Be it physical discomfort, emotional, cultural... whatever. And most significantly, both market and culture consist of millions of people that are driven act to remove that "discomfort", even when it is not even themselves who are discomforted. They do it for "others" (so they think). Their wonderful fulfilled lives are about removing that "discomfort" from everyone else... not themselves.
The end result - An entire society of people categorically unable to deal with the fact that life is imperfect, difficult, problematic, and, dare I say, many times uncomfortable. Lost, maybe forever, are such things as stoicism, determination to overcome, and realism of outlook.
So when confronted with such things as the victory of an opposing party, the reaction is not, "well, time to buckle down, re-assess, and fight the next round", but rather the screams of a discomoforted child. "You CHEATED!.... I'm ENTITLED!.... SOMEONE has to be at fault!.... It's not FAIR!..... etc etc.
On these people's backs lie the survival of Western Civilization.
Sleep well tonight.
By druu222, at Thu May 01
ALL human societies strive toward greater comfort and ease for those members who possess power, which in the modern West to some degree is everyone (capitalism and democracy). That's just human nature at work, nobody other than masochists seek discomfort for the sake of discomfort, and even there it's a question of definition of 'discomfort'.
This is self-correcting in the long term, because the Universe always interrupts the party. Always.
Sooner or later, there will be a major war that refuses to go away or be pushed aside, a large-scale plague, natural disaster, or something, or a really, truly serious economic dislocation such as we haven't seen since the Great Depression, maybe something totally unexpected.
This is the nature of life, the Big Bad Wolf always returns, and the house of straw goes down. It's a when, not an if.
In the meantime, it's no bad thing to appreciate the good times while they're here.
