Comments on: Explain Away http://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/2008/04/15/explain-away/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=explain-away n. the principle of good order<br /><br /> "Observe the strange inversion of all order and sense! Dignity debased; how vilely is the function of a consul prostituted!" ~The Craftsman Fri, 10 Feb 2012 02:25:26 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Josiwe http://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/2008/04/15/explain-away/comment-page-1/#comment-10036 Josiwe Wed, 16 Apr 2008 17:57:32 +0000 http://www.amconmag.com/larison/2008/04/15/explain-away/#comment-10036 Again, perhaps I'm parsing optimistically, but read it this way: Small town conservative voter loses his job. Government doesn't do squat for 20 years. How does he explain his frustrations? How does he justify his vote in the next election? Does he describe his socio-economic situation in the context of globalization and distressed credit? No. He blames foreigners. Or a lack of moral values in his small town. Or left-wing liberals trying to take away his guns, or whichever other Republican talking point makes sense to him and makes it some one's _fault_. Or he lives up to the conservative ideal of self-reliance, moves to a new town and starts over. But that's not who we're discussing... Again, it's not that they cling to these things in everyday life; they cling to the _issues_ in their political lives. The theory is if ducks A, B, C, and D would just get in a row, the politicians could finally "win" the culture war and focus on bringing some jobs back to town. Bottom line: yes, Obama is a little bit paternalistic. After eight years of our good buddy GW, isn't it ok to put someone in charge who is willing to tell us unpleasant truths? Who's willing to come off as condescending if the end result is a better life and more opportunity for the disenfranchised and downtrodden? Again, perhaps I’m parsing optimistically, but read it this way:

Small town conservative voter loses his job. Government doesn’t do squat for 20 years. How does he explain his frustrations? How does he justify his vote in the next election? Does he describe his socio-economic situation in the context of globalization and distressed credit?

No. He blames foreigners. Or a lack of moral values in his small town. Or left-wing liberals trying to take away his guns, or whichever other Republican talking point makes sense to him and makes it some one’s _fault_. Or he lives up to the conservative ideal of self-reliance, moves to a new town and starts over. But that’s not who we’re discussing…

Again, it’s not that they cling to these things in everyday life; they cling to the _issues_ in their political lives. The theory is if ducks A, B, C, and D would just get in a row, the politicians could finally “win” the culture war and focus on bringing some jobs back to town.

Bottom line: yes, Obama is a little bit paternalistic. After eight years of our good buddy GW, isn’t it ok to put someone in charge who is willing to tell us unpleasant truths? Who’s willing to come off as condescending if the end result is a better life and more opportunity for the disenfranchised and downtrodden?

]]>