Letters to the Editor
-
karrsic
The linear view of history is, I think, simplistic, even when viewed over the long haul. I suppose that one could do a linear regression analysis of history to try to fit a more or less straight line through multiple data points (e.g. epochs, eras, events, people, institutions), but it would be a general approximation that would miss much, like looking at the earth from space and thinking what a beautiful place it is, and forgetting all the strife that's taking place out of clear view.
Not to get all pretentious, but I'm more of a Hegelian. He held (as I understand him at least) that history proceeds in a sort of upwardly spiraling fashion, where you end up in a place similar to where you started, only on a newer and higher plane. The idea being that you start out with the current state of affairs (which he called the thesis), it gets "challenged" by a counter state of affairs (which he called the antithesis), strife and turmoil of some sort ensue, and eventually things settle down to a new state of affairs (which he called the synthesis), which in many ways resembles the previous state of affairs, but in a different guise.
E.g. in the late 19th century the countries of Europe were becoming increasingly democratic, prosperous and at peace with one another, and many people believed this to be the "end of history", and that war was pretty much obsolete or at least highly unlikely (i.e. the thesis). However, various factors conspire to pit certain of these countries against one another, leading to an arms race, interlocking alliances, and eventually the horror of WWI (the antithesis), which, once it ended, resulted in a brief period of peace, democracy and, for some countries, even prosperity (the synthesis, which became the new thesis). Of course, this was short-lived, but the general pattern repeated itself, resulting in WWII (antithethis), and the relative peace, democracy and prosperity that resulted upon its conclusion.
Of course, this is a gross oversimplification of how history "works" (it actually doesn't "work", but simply happens). In reality this paradigm takes place in far more complex ways, and in multiple dimensions and levels, which overlap and interact. But I think that it does show such a pattern, especially over the very long haul. E.g. Rome rises, peaks, declines and falls, a "dark" period follows, then a rebirth and rebuilding, culminating in the Renaissance, which itself devolves into religious, national and territorial wars and an era of strife, which eventually settles down, leading to a new era of peace and prosperity, and so on, until we reach the current era. There is, I suppose, a "linear" and progressive aspect to this, if one tries to "plot" the center axis of this spiral. But that view misses so much.
Anyway, long story short, I believe that there is such a thing as progress, but that it's extremely complex, non-linear, and quite subjective (e.g. not everyone would agree that, say, cell phones are a good thing), and often takes steps backwards or sideways on its long-term movement forward (whatever forward means). So yes, we've take some huge steps backwards in recent years. And for all I know this will be permanent. But I seriously doubt it. No one is smart enough to figure out a way to "freeze" history or progress, and the present bunch of idiots are certainly not up to the task. I'm not saying that the path out of this regression will be quick, easy or painless, or in quite the same direction that we want it to go. But, barring the catastrophic destruction of the US, I believe that it'll happen, eventually, somehow.
Remember, even the Germans eventually escaped the clutches of the Nazis. Yes, of course, only after the most gruesome suffering imaginable, but it did happen, eventually. I offer this particular example not to elicit groans of "Oh, great, so if we can wait out 5-10 years of genocide, war and other unspeakable events, we'll finally be out of the dark", because I don't believe that anything close to this is likely to happen, but simply because, by using the most extreme example that I can think of, I hope to show that no situation--good or bad--is permanent, and that bad situations tend to get righted, sooner or later, one way or another (but the obverse also applies, unfortunately--Hegel again).
And now we return to the question of whether we can get out of the current mess, and how, as quickly, satisfyingly and painlessly as possible? Well, I would say that we can do this only by being patient, realistic and tough. I forgot to mention that history also tends to be ironic.
Perhaps that history degree wasn't wasted, after all. ;-)
-
Steve EVfuture
America is not "dead", basically or otherwise. Only a certain version of it might be "dead", but there are multiple if not infinite versions of it, which are constantly dying or being born or reborn. Plus, the very concept of America--i.e. the "core" America upon which all others are based--allows for and encourages a plurality of viewpoints, lifestyles, cultures, beliefs, actions, etc. To some this might mean drinking cheap beer and watching football. To yet others it might mean suing the government or writing for progressive blogs. And to yet others it might mean listening to Rush and bashing liberals. Whatever. It's all America, it's all allowed, and in its totality it's neither good nor bad. It just is.
Yes, of course, today's America has a lot of specific bads. But it also still has lots of specific goods, that continue to thrive and evolve. People still write novels, create art, speak out in defense of justice, develop ways to keep us safe AND free, etc. And the bad, as bad as it is, has not yet, nor do I see any signs that it will soon, stopped most of the good from continuing to happen, quite openly and extensively. So I do not know what you mean by America being "dead". What, exactly, has died, that was previously quite alive and thriving?
Sure, some things have definitely gotten quite ill--and may, even, die. But dead, I just don't see that. Not yet at least--far from it. And this fatalist "end times" nonsense that so many people insist on spouting is, I think, not only unfounded, but ultimately self-serving narcissism, a cop out of the highest order, intended to exempt the believer from the need to actually do anything positive, including to think. It is the domain of overgrown Holden Caufields--i.e. people who think that if it's not exactly how they want things to be, it's all bullshit.
America is only dead to those who believe it to be dead. To the rest of us, it's still very much alive, and will hopefully remain so, however ailing it currently is.
And last time I checked, Germany's still alive, having gone through far worse than we have.
Happy Sputnik day.