Wednesday, January 23, 2008
In The Breakdown Lane: Seeing Red...And Feeling Blue
The beauty of being idealistic is that the idealist has not yet fallen into cynicism. Youth may be wasted on the young, but that is not the fault of those who happen to enjoy youth. And idealism may be youth’s beauty mark born of simple purity, but surely the ugly loss of ideals is rarely caused by the misdeeds of children. No, it is the adults who destroy innocence, who shatter ideals and scar beauty with subtle abuse. Cynicism is often handed down like a legacy, the last will and testament of what it means to be a ‘grown up.’
My sense as a middle-aged man observing the conflict between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton is that millions of Mr. Obama’s supporters are about to have their ideals smashed by the Clinton campaign. At best, at the end of all this, youth’s enthusiastic naïveté (which is not idealism’s sibling) will be chased with a bitter draught of gall.
How can the Clinton campaign, which has clearly misrepresented Mr. Obama -- the ever-gentle man -- expect to inspire that generation of voters who are just beginning to pay attention to politics? Do Mr. and Mrs. Clinton really believe they can ignore the damage they are inflicting on the youngest members of the electorate, that set who overwhelmingly support Mr. Obama in his bid to be the Democratic Party nominee? Or do they believe that, after winning the White House, they can heal the damage that is done? Maybe their forced remedy will come before the White House: perhaps they will offer Mr. Obama a job around the White House, like the vice-presidency or some high profile cabinet post. (He’d be a fool to take it.)
Or perhaps, like so many power-grabbing “me-first” go-getters, the Clintons just don’t care. Maybe this explains Mrs. Clinton’s very first campaign slogan: “I am in this to win.” Her transparency could not be more disgusting: she’s not in “this” to lead or serve America. She is in “to win.” Unfortunately, too few of us have the courage to remind ourselves -- and our neighbors -- of the ghastly truth that people who are “in to win” are generally the worst people in the neighborhood -- and the world.
I am no partisan in this fight, nor am I a supporter of any candidate. I am merely a witness to history, and the history I am witnessing makes me sick. Yesterday, while tuned to the Rush Limbaugh show on the car radio, I nearly cried as I listened to a clip of Mrs. Clinton’s grotesque misrepresentations of Mr. Obama’s statements; I felt like screaming as I heard her commit the fallacy of equivocation (among other things). If I was not a law-abiding citizen, I might have even stopped and exited my car so I could search for something to vandalize.
Largely, my sorrow was directed at the young voters I know who believe in a world that Mr. Obama also believes in, a world of decency and civility and even elegance. Mr. Obama’s vision is, in an ideal sense, a trans-partisan world where the ideals of civility and prudence and tolerance and understanding abound. But I was also angry for Mr. Obama, angry enough to shout to the world that he would be far better treated if he were a Republican; that he’d win his party’s nomination and even the presidency if he were a member of the Grand Old Party.
What do readers think would be the outcome of the GOP race for the nomination had Condoleezza Rice or Colin Powell run for the nation’s highest office? I am sorry...call me a fool; I think either one of them would have been a shoe-in. No other candidates could have stood a chance against them.
I know: I am a fool.
Of course, I admit my native idealism is showing through here, as is my cynicism: both are in a battle, and I’d like to believe my idealism might finally win. But today I am stubbornly prone to aver that if Mr. Obama was indeed a Republican, he’d be president tomorrow if the election were held today. And I further admit that even this very essay may fuel cynicism in the young, and even the old. But my aim is for something higher than merely venting my irascibility or distemper...I do not want to suppress the human spirit. My aim is this audacious hope: I hope that idealism will finally have victory over the deeply cynical, mean-spirited and dire campaign that is being run by the Clintons.
Peace.
©Bill Gnade 2008/Contratimes. All rights reserved.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Wow, Bill. I thoroughly enjoyed this one. I feel you've indeed captured and confronted the zeitgeist on this particular subject.
It is indeed a shame what the Clinton camp is doing. All their nonsensical equivocation and hate-talking cloaked in a slew of pedantic circumlocutions and qualifiers. Does she really think she'll just heal the wounds post-fact? That somehow people like me won't remember this?
She won't, and I won't forget.
Clinton is just another professional politician,hawkish in all that she does and says. A bloody shame, eh?
I suppose there is a certain amount of schadenfreude among those who have always disliked the Clintons for the very reasons you describe. It has always been about power, about facilitating their own narcissism. Anything which threatens their own view of themselves must be vigorously eliminated with out regard to the consequences. It's been obvious to some of us for years.
Yet, for too long their problems were ignored in the name of their (nominal)platform. Their followers sold their souls to hitch a ride on the Clinton wagon. Now, these followers are having their eyes opened and the sight is not pretty.
And the rest of us are amused.
Cheers.
Every morning, I wake up and battle The Beast (aka Cynicism).
I'm 46 and still rooting for Hope too.
Good stuff, Bill. Thanks.
3000 years ago, someone wrote, "There is nothing new under the sun," in a pretty bleak, beautiful and true piece of literature. I've been praying for the redemption of idealism and some victory among our better angels, but that chapter of redemption may not have been written yet.
I think my generation and those younger are getting a taste of bitterness that must have been palpable in 1963 and 1968, when bright glimmers of idealism where dismissed by cynicism and which set the current stage in many respects.
Dear S.C., Randall, and Mike,
It seems others have already described me (elsewhere) as something of a whiner, but I'll take that. Emotions are not always a bad thing; this essay is perhaps the closest I've come to wearing my heart on my, well, browser.
I was reading about the Catholic priest cum poet, Gerard Manly Hopkins, this morning. He, too, struggled with cynicism, though of a far different order than mere political disaffection. His malady was born in the night, where every success in his life dissolved into his many failures, his many missteps and sins of omission. By dawn, he was certain he was damned; nothing in his life seemed to hold any lasting value.
I share this because perhaps my cynicism -- or the threat of it -- is a function of my age. Like Mike, I too begin the day facing a largely interior battle. But is it a function of any age to believe that what we are witnessing is "politics as usual"; that we whiners need to "just deal with it" and accept that none of what we are witnessing in these campaigns amounts to anything shameful or aberrant? Egads! How jaded is that?! Mrs. Clinton and Barack Obama are merely playing political games -- and I should be OK with this? Are you kidding?
The fact is that Mr. Obama has chosen to lead a campaign characterized first and foremost by honor. This may be a mere posture on his part; the cynics may be right that his persona is pre-written, rehearsed; is so much illusion. But the illusion is a good one; it is not one he can shake: He is going to take the high road. (As I said a few weeks ago, Mr. Obama's ideal is probably too good for the White House.) And since he is going to take that higher road, or try to, the idealists behind him can only cringe when they witness the Clinton campaign's attempts to drag him down "to reality."
The best advice I can give to Mr. Obama is this: should Mrs. Clinton drag him towards the dirt during a debate, he should announce without shame that
'if leading this country, Mrs. Clinton, means that I have to act and campaign like you do; if it means being mean-spirited and cutting and underhanded and duplicitous; if it means that I have to offend my convictions in order to score political points over you or any rival, then I must say that I am tempted to walk away from this race. I shall not stoop to what you believe is "real politics;" I reject that very reality. Call me naïve and unrealistic or "unprepared;" I'll gladly take that as a compliment coming from you. But I believe in a presidency that is shrewd and prudent without dishonor; that is wise without mendacity; that is able to confront problems without feigning omniscience. I am a man who seeks the highest office in the world; but if you embody that office's ideals, then I can only say that -- for me -- the office is no longer sufficiently elevated. I want no part of it; my feelings are clear. I am not running to foment cynicism. I am running to lead this country towards greatness. But I can't be a great leader, Mrs. Clinton, if I follow you where no great leader should ever go.'
Mr. Obama may not like the speech I've written for him; he may feel it borders on disrespect. But no great man -- and women know this -- has ever failed to defend himself, especially when his attacker is a woman. He need not lash out at his assailant; he need only demonstrate his superior strength of resolve. And if Mrs. Clinton is indeed his equal -- as many feminists suggest -- then he need not treat her any differently than he would treat a male interlocutor. Let it be remembered that the high road is not the weak road; honor never cowers. Cowardice, however, sows the seeds of cynicism; the coward always fights unfairly: it is easy to cheat, because cheating is done in secret. It is hidden. But honor is always front and center, where heroes belong.
Peace.
BG
GNADE IN '08!
Dear Mike,
Thanks for the encouragement. Thanks, too, for the link. (You too, S.C.)
Since you are the first to write me in, I henceforth crown you my campaign manager. I have no doubt you will exceed my target goals. In the end, I expect abundant wealth -- and no arrests.
And with your southern charm, I am sure you can flush out a real feisty advisor; I need a James Carville with a bow-tie ... and some hair ... but not one given to feral dog imitations. I expect class. Perhaps you should contact Randall Sherman ASAP.
Milton Stanley, I believe, might make a very good press secretary.
Peace.
BG
Post a Comment