My friend Berta just posted this article on Facebook: http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200712/obama
I haven't been following the political race too closely, but I think this article brings out a number of interesting points. It's also more well-written than any summary I could write, but I'll write one anyway for the "skimmers" who seem to be so disproportionately overrepresented in my blog readership... :P
First, the main thrust of the article is that the most important thing about this election is not about the specifics of what we're going to do in Iraq, or how the health care system will evolve, or policy about gay marriage... there aren't so many dramatic differences between candidates' stances on these issues, in terms of what actions they would realistically take.
The article's main argument is that, moreso than these specific policy issues, the biggest issue is the deep schism in American society that reaches back to Vietnam, the hippies, and the Civil Rights movement, a problem which has been greatly exacerbated by the fundamentalist right leaning of the Bush administration. It argues that Obama would be a much better choice than Clinton in terms of unifying the nation and bridging this divide.
There are two other points I found salient in the article. The first was sort of a sidenote, but it made me think... nobody questions the power of the media in shaping the outcome of an election. However, a divided nation voting between diametrically opposed candidates provides an exciting and dramatic battle, captures the public interest, and consequently boosts ratings. So really, healing the nation is not in the interest of the media. Keeping things tense and divided makes for a better show.
Another, unrelated, point was that many of the children in the Middle East have never known any American president other than Bush, and it is critically important to change the image that America projects if we want to gain the trust of the Muslim world.
Anyway, as I said, the article is much more well-written than any summary I can provide. My English skills are really going downhill, as are my Japanese skills. Soon I will only be able to communicate in grunts, gestures, and source code.
3 comments:
really good article.
My Aikido instructor (an older Japanese man who had spent almost half of his life in Canada) made the same comment about his diminishing linguistic skills.
As for the political issues, as a Canadian, all I can say is that from the point I've labelled "Bush", points "Clinton" and "Obama" can be approximated by a single point.
(Just kidding; I don't seriously advocate the "anything-is-better-than-Bush theory of voting)
But seriously, should Clinton or Obama become President, it would be pretty historic. I had a friend (a recent immigrant to Canada) who believed that the U.S. Constitution dictated that the President must be white, male, and Christian. Because if there was no such regulation, what are the odds in a free society that EVERY President in the history of the nation would fit should a narrow demographic category?
Hi Dylan - thanks for posting (forwarding) the article and summarizing it so well! I tried to do the same, and gave up (hence just linking to it from Facebook). ;-) Totally understand declining English language skills!
Post a Comment