Of course the storm affected the election! But more than the immediate damage it caused (Shall we call it "the legitimate damage"? Thank you, Todd Akin!), more than that the storm demanded that we pay attention to what is happening to our climate, and why, the storm made obvious something we have been trying to deny, politically.
We aren't just rugged individuals, intent on making a lot of money. (Only a tiny fraction are.) We aren't just families and towns and cities and States. We are a nation! That is to say, we have a fundamental identity, a sense of belonging, a sense of what we are that is as wide as the continent. So when the storm devastated New Jersey and New York, it did not just damage them: it damaged us.
What has been going on for several years now is that the Tea Party, and some fiscal conservatives, have been denying that we have a national identity. The urge has been to deny that a national government as large as the nation is good or even necessary. It has almost been a pure States Rights argument. As Mitt Romney put it, anything that can be delegated to the States is good, and it would be even better to return decisions and responsibilities to privately-owned businesses. That is to minimize the magnitude of what we are.
The storm made it obvious that New Jersey and New York, by themselves, were not adequate to deal with, not just the immediate storm, but with our infrastructure, with our communications systems, with our power systems, with the kinds of power we need, and the place of such centers of our population that make the nation move. And the storm made it obvious that the things we are doing--or not doing--that affect the atmosphere and sea levels are much larger than single States, and perhaps even nations. But it is as a nation that we have to respond. It is as a nation that help was needed, not just because of the magnitude of the problem, but because we knew, almost immediately, that we belong together.
In his acceptance speech, after the election, Barack Obama spoke of the things we need to do together, as a nation; not as Republicans or Democrats, not as cities and States, but as a nation. When he strummed that theme oratorically, the crowd sang out the song of being one people, with a common identity. It was the alternative to the savage hatred of government we have been hearing for several years, an alternative to the notion that acting together is not necessary. It was an affirmation, and an echoing affirmation that America has for too long flirted with self-denial, self-rejection, and almost self-mutilation: "Starve the beast! Cut taxes! Turn everything over to a company that can strip the carcass and sell the parts." Maybe Bain Capital.
Maybe we can begin the process of saying what we do want as a nation. What kind of schools do we want? How much should a person be paid for working all day? How much military is necessary to insure our place in the world? What kind of health care should any citizen expect to receive? How should we pay for it? How do we want to elect people to represent us? Does any religion, even one we are familiar with, have any right to determine what our citizens may do? What color skin must an American have? Should men and women have different civil and legal rights?
What kind of a place do we want this to be? It is up to us.
We aren't just rugged individuals, intent on making a lot of money. (Only a tiny fraction are.) We aren't just families and towns and cities and States. We are a nation! That is to say, we have a fundamental identity, a sense of belonging, a sense of what we are that is as wide as the continent. So when the storm devastated New Jersey and New York, it did not just damage them: it damaged us.
What has been going on for several years now is that the Tea Party, and some fiscal conservatives, have been denying that we have a national identity. The urge has been to deny that a national government as large as the nation is good or even necessary. It has almost been a pure States Rights argument. As Mitt Romney put it, anything that can be delegated to the States is good, and it would be even better to return decisions and responsibilities to privately-owned businesses. That is to minimize the magnitude of what we are.
The storm made it obvious that New Jersey and New York, by themselves, were not adequate to deal with, not just the immediate storm, but with our infrastructure, with our communications systems, with our power systems, with the kinds of power we need, and the place of such centers of our population that make the nation move. And the storm made it obvious that the things we are doing--or not doing--that affect the atmosphere and sea levels are much larger than single States, and perhaps even nations. But it is as a nation that we have to respond. It is as a nation that help was needed, not just because of the magnitude of the problem, but because we knew, almost immediately, that we belong together.
In his acceptance speech, after the election, Barack Obama spoke of the things we need to do together, as a nation; not as Republicans or Democrats, not as cities and States, but as a nation. When he strummed that theme oratorically, the crowd sang out the song of being one people, with a common identity. It was the alternative to the savage hatred of government we have been hearing for several years, an alternative to the notion that acting together is not necessary. It was an affirmation, and an echoing affirmation that America has for too long flirted with self-denial, self-rejection, and almost self-mutilation: "Starve the beast! Cut taxes! Turn everything over to a company that can strip the carcass and sell the parts." Maybe Bain Capital.
Maybe we can begin the process of saying what we do want as a nation. What kind of schools do we want? How much should a person be paid for working all day? How much military is necessary to insure our place in the world? What kind of health care should any citizen expect to receive? How should we pay for it? How do we want to elect people to represent us? Does any religion, even one we are familiar with, have any right to determine what our citizens may do? What color skin must an American have? Should men and women have different civil and legal rights?
What kind of a place do we want this to be? It is up to us.
Comments
Post a Comment