Why? Seriously, I look at this stuff and I just don't get it. Why does America now have this hate-filled polarization in its politics? The 'polarization' is between two poles that are about 6 inches apart. How many Americans want a revolution? How many want an end to capitalism and its replacement with (socialism/fascism/etc)? And electorally, how much substantive difference is there? A bunch of single issues (abortion, gun control etc) and some technical differences over regulating individuals vs businesses, where to draw the line between helping the needy and requiring personal responsibiity, etc. All real enough and meriting many hours of argument down the coffee house. But talk about shooting each other? (OK, talk from one side about shooting the other, where the other is in principle opposed to talking about shooting anyone.) W? T? F? Within living memory, the Spanish had quite an internal political disagreement. Anarchism, communism, fascism were all on the table. Should the Church help dictate policy or should it be destroyed altogether? Plus all options in the middle. When Franco relieved the siege of the military academy in Toledo, the gutters ran red with blood. Can we really imagine the gutters of Toledo, Ohio, running red with blood? Certain politicians and media figures have been pumping up rhetoric to further their own careers (and to cover up their own weaknesses and the emptiness of their policies). OK, this has always been done. But it seems that the irresponsibility and inflammatory nature of this rhetoric is at heights we haven't seen since the 19th century. Or maybe I'm overstating the whole thing. This kind of furore seems to come and go in cycles. Maybe our problem isn't one of politics but of tastelessness.
no subject
Seriously, I look at this stuff and I just don't get it. Why does America now have this hate-filled polarization in its politics?
The 'polarization' is between two poles that are about 6 inches apart.
How many Americans want a revolution? How many want an end to capitalism and its replacement with (socialism/fascism/etc)? And electorally, how much substantive difference is there? A bunch of single issues (abortion, gun control etc) and some technical differences over regulating individuals vs businesses, where to draw the line between helping the needy and requiring personal responsibiity, etc.
All real enough and meriting many hours of argument down the coffee house. But talk about shooting each other? (OK, talk from one side about shooting the other, where the other is in principle opposed to talking about shooting anyone.) W? T? F?
Within living memory, the Spanish had quite an internal political disagreement. Anarchism, communism, fascism were all on the table. Should the Church help dictate policy or should it be destroyed altogether? Plus all options in the middle.
When Franco relieved the siege of the military academy in Toledo, the gutters ran red with blood. Can we really imagine the gutters of Toledo, Ohio, running red with blood?
Certain politicians and media figures have been pumping up rhetoric to further their own careers (and to cover up their own weaknesses and the emptiness of their policies). OK, this has always been done. But it seems that the irresponsibility and inflammatory nature of this rhetoric is at heights we haven't seen since the 19th century.
Or maybe I'm overstating the whole thing. This kind of furore seems to come and go in cycles. Maybe our problem isn't one of politics but of tastelessness.