Random US election musings from a non-US citizen
So as the title says, since I'm not US born nor a US-citizen, I don't really have a horse in that election and can watch it with only casual interest. It does produce some rather entertaining things, like say this video from Joss Whedon. It's really funny, go watch it if you haven't already.
He's not the only one who frames the election in such, for lack of a better word, stark terms. There's similar gnashing of teeth on the Republican side. It's very clear, for each side, that a vote for the wrong person is Apocalyptic. Literally, if you believe Whedon doesn't have his tongue in his cheek. It's shocking, for both sides, that the election can be so close when one option is so obviously wrong.
Since I don't really live in the US nor follow all the news and, more importantly, the wonk commentary, I'm the first to admit to not being a qualified judge of the situation. But my worthless opinion is that, actually, none of the choices is apocalyptic. None of the choices is all that better. The same forces that keep progressive milestones alive like Roe v. Wade in the face of opposition from religious groups are the same forces that alas prevent comprehensive health care reform. Inertia dominates politics. Only baby steps allowed. There will be no apocalypse.
That might have been interesting at least. Maybe the tragedy isn't that 'the stupid others' are deluded in voting for the wrong guy. Maybe the tragedy is that, policy-wise, all options are the same.
Update: Mark Evanier tends to agree that there's too much of the "if the wrong guy wins, we're all doomed" shtick going on. But what does he know, he's just a writer whose blog I follow.
He's not the only one who frames the election in such, for lack of a better word, stark terms. There's similar gnashing of teeth on the Republican side. It's very clear, for each side, that a vote for the wrong person is Apocalyptic. Literally, if you believe Whedon doesn't have his tongue in his cheek. It's shocking, for both sides, that the election can be so close when one option is so obviously wrong.
Since I don't really live in the US nor follow all the news and, more importantly, the wonk commentary, I'm the first to admit to not being a qualified judge of the situation. But my worthless opinion is that, actually, none of the choices is apocalyptic. None of the choices is all that better. The same forces that keep progressive milestones alive like Roe v. Wade in the face of opposition from religious groups are the same forces that alas prevent comprehensive health care reform. Inertia dominates politics. Only baby steps allowed. There will be no apocalypse.
That might have been interesting at least. Maybe the tragedy isn't that 'the stupid others' are deluded in voting for the wrong guy. Maybe the tragedy is that, policy-wise, all options are the same.
Update: Mark Evanier tends to agree that there's too much of the "if the wrong guy wins, we're all doomed" shtick going on. But what does he know, he's just a writer whose blog I follow.
As I wrote to my American friend post-election, there seemed to be far too much "The wrong man won, have to skip town, America will fall tomorrow, doom is nigh, Save Our Souls" happening. It was frustrating to watch as a person and infuriating to watch as a voter. The world will not end just because someone got voted in, and they have a planned election in four years to rectify the situation!
ReplyDeleteI really wished (at the time) that they'd get some perspective and stop making it into a melodrama. I imagined it was a lot like young kids who didn't get something for Christmas.
*cough* rant over...
Well said. I'd expect such melodrama to occur elsewhere as well, but either I pay it even less attention, or it's more subdued.
DeleteThe US is a very polarized society. You can fairly accurately predict someone's stance on evolution, gun control, abortion, immigration, capital punishment, and recent military interventions, simply by knowing their stance on one of them. (Previous observation valid on internet forums, anyway; selection bias may apply.)