On August 13th, The New York Times published two opinion columns, which ran on facing pages. On Page A20, Kurt Andersen suggested that "The United States Is Locked In A Bitter, Loveless Marriage." I have just provided you with the hardcopy version of the headline. Online, the headline is a question: "Has America Already Undergone A Soft Breakup?" Andersen says, "Yes." His forthcoming novel, The Times tells us, is titled, "The Breakup," about the United States split into two (or more) nations.
On Page A21, right across the centerfold, Times Opinion writer Michelle Cottle profiles Dan Osborn, a Senate candidate aiming to unseat an incumbent Republican Party Senator in Nebraska. The hardcopy version of Cottle's headline reads this way: "This Independent Hates Both Parties." The online version, which is what you'll get if you click that link, has the following headline: "He's Not A Democrat. Democrats Love Him Anyway."
As you can see, there are some common issues discernable, across those facing pages. Both columns suggest that our national politics is, at least currently, "Either/Or," to commandeer the title of a wonderful book by Søren Kierkegaard, a Danish philosopher. In American politics, "Either/Or" is currently being translated into "Red" or "Blue," Republican or Democrat. It's one way to talk about the partisan polarization that is now so determinative of how we see our political world.
The Andersen thesis is that the polarity just described - a polarity that is definitely "real" - means that we will probably have to "call it quits," and that there really is not any remaining vitality in that description of the United States that I remember, still, from my days in elementary school, as the class recited, each day, the following words:
I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
One nation? Indivisible? Anderson suggests that's probably not really true. Cottle, who writes about politics for a living, is not so ready to move to a "split the nation" proposal. She does note, though, the massively polarized state of our current politics, and is hoping for "more coalitions."
I have two quick comments. First, I share Cottle's hope (and admonition, really) that our politics start reflecting not party polarization but coalitions built on shared programs for the future of the nation. With respect to Andersen's willingness to give up on that "one Nation" idea, it's my view that Andersen makes what I consider to be one of the most pernicious mistakes a person can ever make, in confusing existing realities with "inevitabilities." What "exists" seems so real to us, most of the time, that we forget that "reality" is what we decide, and what we do. Our ideas about what we want the world to be, followed by our actions, based on our ideas, will create the world in which we most immediately live. That world is, as each one of my daily blog postings proclaims, a "political world."
Let us not make that "category mistake" that confuses "reality" with what currently exists. Our future is up to us, and Cottle is actually documenting a current effort to put that truth to the test, and to use politics to transform the realities that seem like "inevitabilities," across those facing pages.
One final note: We call it the "Pledge" of Allegiance because the Nation depends - as all the realities in our "political world" do - on our continuing determination to accomplish what we say we believe in.
The "Pledge of Allegiance" is the shorthand version of our Declaration of Independence, issued on behalf of all Americans, then and now. The nation it envisions is a nation we "create." Or not. It's up to us.
Have I mentioned before that his is what "self-government" is actually all about and why Lincoln's formulation makes this essential point so clear? What sort of nation do we inhabit, what sort of "government" do we have?
Answer: A government "of the people, by the people, and for the people." Remember that "by the people" part!
Let's make that real, shall we? That's what that "Pledge of Allegiance" both implies and requires!
Image Credit:
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/09/opinion/america-politics-blue-red-democrats-republicans.html
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thanks for your comment!