In The Jury Box;

By David Eide

These are opinions of a free, liberal democratic citizen, not a scholar, not a political scientist. I see things. And report through whatever sensibility I may have; a certain knowledge base and experience base, perhaps a bit of idealism as well as realism thrown in there. I would give them a much more robust sense of self and take them lightly

XML

The four main concerns of the baby-boom generation (1) Vietnam, Nationalism and the place of American power (2) civil rights and making African Americans whole and free (3) Stimulated by "whole Earth" photo, the environmental husbandry (4) Freedom of women to make choices, go in the directions of their passions and talents, live independently etc. That was back in the 60's and 70's. They provided the background for the subsequent politics, no matter if Democrats were in power or Republicans. Was there progress in the intervening years? Yes. Some backtracking took place as well, even due diligence, but progress without a doubt.

One assumes this becomes part of the national DNA and is transferred to the future. Standing 50 years ago and some of the things that have happened would have seemed "impossible" at that moment. A lot of bad has passed as well. Trump, for instance, represents his fathers generation and the resentment they had for all those changes. I see no evidence that Trump experienced that period as anything other than a playground for his personal desires.

What "impossibilities" will exist in 2070? Perhaps the warthogs are rutting in the desecrated, broken down capitol building or White House. I hope not. I don't believe that. But it's perfectly within the realm of the impossible, possible.

You not only have basic divides between "tribes" you have many sub tribes within the main tribes all with different levels of experience and knowledge, income and relative freedom.

Even in the middle of chaos and collective weirdness one asks the question, "now that you have this freedom, this liberty, what are you going to do? And how do you reach that conclusion?"

* * * * * * * *

A huge rift opened up at that time between the "democratic conscience" as against the "necessities of being a world power." What then is the government?

The "government" especially when it comes to the rest of the world can not be, as much as we wish it were, a reflection of ourselves, our best nature. This is the dread that faces the aspirations of the liberal democratic citizen: that the world is anarchy until an order emerges through treaties, trade, balance, sheer power and so on. When this order breaks down it bottoms out to chaos again as happened in the 30's and 40's.

It's a "crazy" world and produces, for instance, a few dozen people who train to hijack jets and crash them into large, full-of-people buildings, all in a secret kept for years. Or, a third rate nation who produces nukes and keeps demonstrating its ability to put them on missiles and threatening to use them.

This conflict prevents us from seeing that democracy is not "my point of view as expressed through this group of people." Democracy is the foundation of all the people and their "inalienable rights". Out of the democracy comes a republic that is a structure of power and administration through which the work of a "public" gets done. And it exists on a federal, state, local level. And it is filled with people voted in and people who are hired. It is centered in budget and whatever mission statement various aspects of the republic give themselves. Politics is a collection of ideas and attitudes about how that Republic should deal with the public life. Politics is filled with emotion, including the will to power, hate, fear, resentment and so on. Media is filled with "perception" and the interpretation of perception. People who feel trapped by life usually have one sort of politics and those who feel free or liberated by life have another.

* * * * * * * *

Then I am brought back to politics. At least the campaign '20 is getting clarified. Trump, Sanders, Biden, and Bloomberg are the main actors. The question is whether or not the people, collectively, want to take a big leap with big risks and restructure the economy or to commit to some form of reformist policies. I haven't decided myself. Something is attracted to Sanders, nostalgia for a lost time perhaps, or a lost youth. I know the resistance to Sanders' ideas but maybe something would get through. But if nothing got through? If what got through did relatively nothing and damaged the more productive areas? It's a risk. But that vector is open.

FDR and New Deal opened a new vector. Reagan, who ran against FDR, opened a new vector. Now, Sanders is inviting America to enter a new vector. It would depend on how well Sanders deals with some of the fierce true believers and ideologues. How long would it be, for instance, before the wealthy would figure out how to skirt around these taxes? And who would pay for the "free" programs? We know who would. It just sounds like a train wreck. However, the American spirit is such that it leaps into huge challenges, realizes its out of its depth and then thrashes madly for survival and is able to swim to the surface and, often, thrive. So, I don't discount Bernie.

I think Democrats are very concerned about losing the House and other down-ballot elections. In the process of kneecapping him they might win the election for Trump. And all Trump has to do, as long as the virus doesn't get out of control and the economy is stable, is clean up a bit of his act, reach out just a tiny bit, contradict all the media critics and he wins hands down. Here's the thing: if the object is to get rid of Trump then all of this reformist talk is secondary. Then the election is about getting rid of Trump and not bringing in a revolution of some sort. That would discount Bernie and his crowd. If the election is about a fundamental change in the economy with all the unintended consequences that might inspire, then Trump will win because many Democrats will not vote, at least for President, some may even leap over to Trump in an act of self-preservation. As the election gets closer these programs suggested by Bernie will get more and more scrutiny and frighten more and more people or threaten them at least.

The Democrats could have a "Trumpism" problem on their hands if Bernie successfully takes over the party. I don't think he can but if he gets this furious momentum he might. That's when the American genius will have to leap forward and craft a liberal, democratic core out of the extremes.

The "best way" is somewhere between the paralysis of analysis and wild decisions by a single person. You always have to respect your adversaries and think from his point of view before thinking of your point of view.
Back to Media Resources

---

Click here to send your comments on what you read here.

Previous Events:

Post-election 2004

Election 2004

On Political Culture

On the Debates

War on Terrorism

The California Recall

The Progressive Era

What is a perfect President?

On Political Culture

On JFK Assassination

The Clinton Bubble

The state of things

IRAQ

Affirmative Action

Liberals and Nuders

The Trent Lott Affair

Why the Democrats are in Trouble

The Uncertain Decade

Back to Events

Back to Media Resource page

eide491@earthlink.net
Copyright 2021