Like 1968, 2008 could decide the direction of American politics for decades to come.
The parallels are striking--a President leaving office with an unpopular war still going on, long-standing social issues to be resolved and cultural changes breaking up what had seemed to be a consensus among previous generations.
Back then, there was Vietnam instead of Iraq, racial and gender equality rather than illegal immigration, and hippies, campus revolts and sexual revolution in place of today's faith-based conflicts over public regulation of private behavior.
The 1960s started with Kennedy's new frontier and ended with Nixon's Silent Majority. Decades of Democratic dominance gave way to Republican rule. Now, Bush's compassionate conservatism is ending and will lead to what?
For most of our history, Americans have been protected from violent change by a double-edged inertia that was slow to correct injustices but was a buffer against the kind of social breakdown that afflicts almost all other nations.
How much of our tranquility was based on technology or the lack of it? In the 1960s, television made the poor, oppressed and victims of war visible for the first time, bringing them into history and American living rooms. Vietnam and racial violence were not confined to impersonal newspaper headlines, and the results were protest and upheaval across the country.
Now, a flood of images and information about terrorism, war and their consequences washes over us 24/7 on cable and online. Politicians are less free to soothe or distract us from our own reactions and opinions.
But as the chaos of this campaign so far illustrates, the results may be division, confusion and uncertainty about whom to trust with the power to make sense of it all and get us back on track. The more we talk, it seems, the more polarized we become. But somebody has to be President and work with a Congress we choose to lead us out of all this.
In 1968, we picked Richard Nixon. In 2008, we will have to do better than that.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
But there is at least one critical difference between 1968 and 2008: despite the increase in information through the internet, and cable TV, there are no non-violent marches.
Beyond expecting the liberals to march, I wonder what prevents people afraid of black helicopters from marching to protest illegal government spying and telecom immunity, which will prevent the public from knowing exactly how bad the illegality has been. If the government can spy on us with impunity, then cover its tracks by getting Congress to grant immunity, it's not a stretch to think the government can take away your guns. While I don't buy that logic, my guess is many people would.
Instead, all you hear are the crickets.
I got here from Jon Swift's link to your MLK to Obama piece. I really am mystified that, in the Reagan era, from roughly the 1970s to now, there are no advocates of non-violence in the public realm. It seems more viable today than at any other time than the 1960s.
Lots of good writing here: thank you for that!
Post a Comment