Doug
-
02:42:18 am on January 29, 2004 | # |
dangerousmeta!: Political process.: Political process. I see some prominent webloggers are advocating a ‘truce’ between Democratic contenders’ followers. That we shouldn’t be comparing apples to apples in the public view other than in a ‘positive manner’ … bowing and scraping while we stick the knife in … as if the nitpicking we do intra-party is going to be of any consequence compared to what the Right has in store for our chosen candidate.
Remember Robert Byrd? “The right to ask questions, debate, and dissent is under attack.” Just a short time ago, asking specific questions called one’s patriotism into question. Now our dedication to Party is under attack for debating the pros and cons of our candidates? Little did I believe we would fall for this same ill-advised philosophy.
Garret hammers home an excellent point. It’s damn frightening that the post-9/11 climate seems to have established a new norm in American society, under which debate and dissension are not permitted. This behavior is present across the political spectrum, and represents a far greater danger to the future of our Republic than any terrorist threat.
American politics is a form of social Darwinism. Far better that the Democratic candidates pass through the fire of pre-election campaigning and emerged tempered and strong before being subject to the hammer blows of the Republican political machine. Rather than being a sign of a lack of dedication to one’s political party, the process of questioning debating, and dissenting with one’s slate of candidates is the best, and probably only means of ensuring that the best possible candidate emerges. It’s a sign of support for, and faith in one’s party to do so.
We Americans have been enormously successful because of our national proclivity to question and dissent, not only in politics, but in business, science, and in how we run our society. To lose that would be to lose what is quite possibly the most important component of our liberty.
