Loose Change

"'Cheer up,' they said. 'Things could be worse.' So I did. And sure enough, they were"

Isn't it ironic that the "change" everyone demands would really reverse earlier changes?

Each and every candidate is jumping on the "change" bandwagon. Each argues that he or she has the unique ability to end the self-interested deadlock in Washington and force the compromises necessary to get things done.

But isn't that the kind of accommodation that was so vilified by the forces of" change" a decade or two ago? They argued that negotiation was "dealing with the devil. That's what they said then, that's what they say now.

Let's face it: This campaign is fueled by nothing short of hatred. We have nothing that resembles the common-goal "competition of ideas," where advocates on either side of an issue respect the other.

All of this amplified by the simple minded "he said-she said" news coverage that celebrates a battle of the sound bites more than anything else. Someone once said that the media's marching orders are to "Get out there and scratch the surface!" It would be funny if it wasn't so true.

It is a poisonous atmosphere. Instead of "competition" we have a contempt for ideas other than our own. One has to wonder whether we can ever get back to an environment where those who disagree are "opponents" not "enemies"

First of all, we have to decide whether it's a good idea. The type of "bringing folks together" that looks so good in the abstract, inevitably results in the kind of behind-the-scenes wheeling and dealing that leaves the rest of us being screwed and not knowing exactly how. No one wants to frame this as a question about the lesser of two evils All we want to hear is that something has to "change" whatever it is.

All we really have thus far is a frustrated clamor for "Back to the Future" "change". It rolls easily off of the candidates' lips, but no one really goes beyond the platitudes. Platitudes in politics? That will never change.

Follow Bob Franken on Twitter: www.twitter.com/frankenb

Comments

[RTIII]

Responding specifically to: "One has to wonder whether we can ever get back to an environment where those who disagree are "opponents" not "enemies"."

As I see it, the once reasonable Republican party (that, for example, gave us the Clean Air act - that was actually for Clean Air!) has become (since at least Ronald Reagan) the American Faciest Party by another name. They ARE the enemy of patriotic Americans because they are attempting (and unfortunately largely succeeding) to tear down the Constitution and its intended framework.

When you convincingly argue that what we have now is NOT a faciest state, THEN I'll go along with "opponent" instead of "enemy."

[Sundialsvc4]

I could be wrong, or I could simply be a little bit ahead of the bandwagon, but I suspect that what is really happening here is a sea-change among young Americans (and young people throughout the world community) that is so very fundamental that it is being overlooked.

As the conventional political thinking goes (obediently followed by a pliant press that knows who butters its bread), what we basically have right now is a choice of "brands." Pick a 'candidate,' any 'candidate.' They come in a choice of attractive colors, and this year for the first time, attractive genders, and when you push the button they recite whatever their tele-prompters tell them to say.

But... this is a new generation, Bob, and maybe you-n-me don't really yet see how fundamentally different their thinking can be. Perhaps in our 'conventional wisdom' we are studying which color of plastic seems to work best when selling an 8-track tape: red, black, or blue.

What if the reason why this far-too-soon and oh-so scripted "so-called election" is running bumpy this year ... is that we are all staring at irrelevance and do not know how to recognize it?

What if young people (and middle-aged folks too) DO go to http://thomas.loc.gov, look up the "National Service Act of 2007," read it and understand it ... grasp its meaning ... and really, truly act? What if they actually force the issue of Impeachment right back ON to "the table?"

What if all the king's P.R. horses and all the king's billions of dollars simply do not have the crowd-bending control that they are "supposed" to have? What if it really IS "different" now?

What if "conventional wisdom" doesn't work any more?

Is anyone watching what's going on, say, in Second Life these days?

[kevinabt]

Ron Paul does a good job of actually articulating what changes can be made, in a very indepth and non-superficial way (unlike many politicians tend to do). He has very specific ideas about what can be done with social security, the US empire, the federal reserve, the IRS, debt, personal liberties, and much more.
We should be asking why more of the media isn't picking up on these ideas and bringing them to us, but instead bemoans the lack of substantive in our political discussion.
The simple answer would be that problems are so deeply entrenched and difficult/­painful/ex­pensive to fix that many people just don't want to be bothered.