Letters to the Editor
jwr_12
Published Letters: 149 Editor's Choice: 45
-
It's all war
[Read the article: Things that don't exist in Harry Reid's world]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I think the thing isn't so much that Reid is not cognizant of those other votes, but that the Republicans, even for him, have successfully branded all of those issues "the war."
They've sculpted a broad political language in which:
* Everything related to justice or lack thereof is part of fighting "the war" (i.e. torture, habeas corpus, etc.)
* The attorney general's office is necessary to fight "the war" (hence you need Mukasey)
* You need a stalwart commander in chief next election to fight "the war" (hence you vote McCain).
Practically speaking of course, Lieberman can vote for anything because the Democratic Party needs his vote to hold the majority. But "the war" by now is so capacious that virtually any inconsistency can be covered by gesturing to it as the one issue separating him out, all the while knowing this *one* issue holds anything anymore.
I suppose it's also telling that Reid doesn't say "the war in Iraq" or "Afghanistan" or anywhere else (even the "war on terror"). It's all just "the war", ubiquitous, continuous, eternal, and all encompassing.
A monument to Republican bamboozlery.
-
Tell the Archbishop of Denver
[Read the article: The right's selective political manipulation of Catholicism]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Well, here's the thing: right-wing US Catholics have already found a work around on this one. Several years ago, the Archbishop of Denver (at the time) made several fine distinctions about the Iraq war. The first was that it was, arguably, theologically defensible as a 'just war'. Second, that although the Pope was against it, he had not made this opposition into a formal doctrine, but rather had expressed an opinion. Thus, while Church dogma on abortion was binding, Church opinion about US policy was not.
I don't think I err here, though to be honest I don't have time this morning to fact check. I had a rather heated exchange with his Holiness (the Archbishop) by e-mail at the time. The upshot of it was, however, the war was deplored by the Pope, but we are theologically allowed to be fine with it; abortion, however, is another matter.
The sort of reasoning that gave the scholastic tradition a bad name, I'm afraid.
-
The History Conspiracy
[Read the article: Is everything we know about American history wrong?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I have to say that as a professional historian, I'm a little tired of this particular genre: I'll call it the "History Conspiracy" genre. Every so often, an author and publisher and reviewers agree to take the strategy, "This is what THEY didn't teach you in school! The history THEY didn't want YOU to know!"
It reminds me of that guy on TV who sells all the cures THEY don't want US to know! (Baking soda cures cancer, etc.)
The truth is there are a lot of hard working, decent, thoughtful, honest history researchers and teachers, and have been for a long time. History curricula are constantly under revision (for good and bad reasons), but people have been trying to diversify, complicate, revise, etc., history for a long time. And even the 'bad old history', if read generously and attentively, is very instructive.
What I think this genre is all about is something else: it flatters the pride of those who blew off their high school history classes; who felt above it all but couldn't name why; or who simply didn't give a damn at the time--maybe they were watching animes and/or strategizing their law school applications--and so didn't really take anything in.
Whatever. The point is that there is no vast "history conspiracy" out there seeking to prevent Americans from knowing "real history." It's a complicated field. There are thousands of voices, some good, some bad, some half-truthful, some totally confused, and a very few that are excellent. LIKE ANY FIELD OF HUMAN ENDEAVOR!
And simply blaming "them" because at somepoint YOU didn't get the memo --- well, it may sell copies, but it flatters one of America's most disgusting vanities: namely, that our ignorance is someone else's fault.
If you'd wanted to know, you'd have known. Now you do. Keep learning, this time!
-
Unsustainable Norms
[Read the article: Have we fallen behind our parents?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Without falling into the "people should cut out the lattes" camp, I think that a good deal of the problem for my generation--people in their 40s, with good jobs but still sinking in debt--is that we were raised with unsustainable norms. The large house, the two cars, that's all part of it, but I think there's another thing that may need revisiting: the assumption that it's possible to sustain close, face to face family relationships AND careers that rocket us from one end of the country (and world) to another.
Most of the people I know from my peer group do not live in the same town as either their parents or their siblings. Quite often, they live hundred of miles apart. My own sister lives in Arizona; my parents in Oregon; myself in Illinois.
When I was growing up, I never gave a second thought to this, despite having very close relationships with my parents, etc. I just assumed that twice a year or so I would hop on a plane and fly to see everybody. That was the norm.
But now that I have a family (wife, two kids) AND that plane tickets have gone sky-high, that norm seems a little weird. We're spending, like, $4000/year on plane tickets (and my youngest doesn't buy a ticket yet!). For the nonce, that's the sort of stuff that ends up on the credit card. In the future, though, I definitely think I will have to make a choice: see the folks rarely, or make getting a job in their town a greater priority than pursuing my career.
I think many Americans are in this boat: bicoastal, tricoastal familial relationships that were based on low petroleum costs and airfares. A norm that you could buy your way over distance. No longer.
I wonder how many aspects of middle class family patterns--not lattes, mind you, but basic, structural elements--are about to change drastically. And this isn't so much about the squeeze being applied by health care, etc., as by the end of the petroleum age.