Roger Berkowitz, the Founder and Academic Director of The Hannah Arendt Center at Bard College, sends out a weekly bulletin. It's usually pretty good! The posting I received from Dr. Berkowitz on June 1st, was titled: "The Age of Hypocrisy." I think you can read it (no bothersome paywall to prevent you) by just clicking that link. Berkowitz claims that his latest bulletin is a "7 min read."
Mostly, Berkowitz is pointing out that our politics no longer center on "the economy." He believes that our politics used to center on the economy, and that the phrase made famous by political operative James Carville, in 1992, "It's the economy, stupid," no longer pertains. Now, says Berkowitz, our politics is dominated by "rage against hypocrisy."
I think Berkowitz is on to something - and something important. However, I want to comment on what I believe is a grammar-related mistske that I think Berkowitz has made, and to point out that we all need to be careful not to talk ourselves into believing things that may well not be true. Here's the first paragraph of the Berkowitz bulletin, with a highlighted sentence that causes me some concern:
A settled truth of recent American politics has been: “It’s the economy, stupid.” But this simple maxim is no longer as powerful as it once was. Today, what animates voters is not only economic pain or prosperity — it’s the rage against hypocrisy. Corruption that once disqualified a politician is now overlooked — or even admired — so long as it is without pretense and when it is perceived to be the privilege of real and raw power. At a moment when trust in liberal institutions is collapsing, Americans are willing to accept open corruption so long as that corruption is seen to be in the service of power (emphasis added).
My discomfort comes from Berkowitz's use of the word, "Americans." There is no doubt that millions of Americans are willing to accept open corruption, as Berkowitz says. Furthermore, lots of Members of Congress seem to be among their number. But "Americans," used just like that, in the plural, implies (and is conventionally read as) ALL Americans.....
I think "Americans," as Berkowitz is using it, needs to be qualified. "Many" Americans might be one way (if you think that is the right description). Or, "a number of" Americans could work. "Americans" by itself implies, the way I read it, that ALL Americans are "willing to accept open corruption...."
I do NOT believe that "all" Americans are willing to accept the kind of corruption that is so clearly visible in the way that our current president, his family, and his billionaire friends have been conducting themselves. Millions of Americans are holding signs on street corners, and are getting ready to demonstrate, on June 14th, how much they object to what is going on. Millions of Americans, and in a multitude of ways, are doing what they can to "Resist" the kind of politics of corruption that we see in every daily newspaper, and on every television screen, and in the posts that flood our social media. "NO KINGS" is the message that perhaps millions of Americans are going to endorse on June 14th.
MANY people are afraid of what is happening, and expresss not only distress, but hopelessness at the kind of "corruption" that we see so clearly, everywhere. IF "all" Americans actually "accept" what is going on, that hopelessness is well justified.
But it's not true that Berkowitz's observations apply generally, to "all" Americans. People tend to believe what they "see," and they often "see" what they are "told." We are, clearly, being told in a number of different ways that the country "accepts" what is going on. The result, for those who then "believe" this, is the promotion of despair and defeatism.
I think we need to take care not to feed a kind of defeatism and despair that is NOT merited. When it's "game over," the fans go home. When we believe that we have lost, we stop trying to win. In our politics, it's nowhere near "game over," and I feel the need to speak out in opposition to anything that might lead people to believe that it is.
I do not believe that "all" Americans have capitulated to corruption, in the way Berkowitz describes, and I think it's important to be careful, as we describe real issues and real problems, not to give the impression that our "idealistic" notions about genuine self-government, a government operated of, by, and for the people, is something that has, actually, been lost.
In danger? Yes. Lost, as Americans accept the open corruption of our politics? Not yet! And never, unless we give up the fight.
Image Credit:
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thanks for your comment!