Thankfully, the presidential election is almost here. I, for one, have gotten rather tired of this campaign season, which started so long ago that no one can seem to remember a time before it was. Yet as much as I'm happy to see this campaign end, and as much as I dislike certain things about all the candidates, can I just say this is a wonderful process? Every now and then I sit back and realize just want is going on: the citizens of this great republic of ours are considering the candidates and, come November, they will cast their ballots by the millions, electing a president. For most of human history, and indeed around much of the world today, this has been an impossibility, or at best a dream.
So however messy the campaign, and however imperfect the candidate we will elect, this whole thing makes me pretty darn proud to be part of the American experiment in self-government.
4 comments:
It is impressive, even without all eligible voters participating - only 60% voting in 2004. Then again, some would say that the ability to sit home and let the system proceed is a sign that the system works.
Pardon my cynicism, Aaron, but I have one question for you: Should we celebrate a process that encourages such triviality? The reason why you, like so many others, are happy to see this campaign end is that the process of electioneering leads to endless chatter. Politicians want to stay in the news every day, but don't give enough thought to what they say. Thus, the rampant triviallity of the last year. In democratic politics, silence is not golden.
I think I'm basically optimistic about the state of the American polity *in spite of* the triviality and chatter, not because of it. But I guess it's not so much a question of whether or not I'm optimistic; rather, I marvel that a process this silly can work this well.
And while I agree that the chatter is often absurd in its quality - hence my desire to see it end - I am somewhat encouraged by the great interest Americans have taken in politics of late, even if that interest is too often superficial. At least it is not apathy. The man on the street is probably more likely to have an opinion now than at any time in a long time.
Still, I am puzzled with what to do with Therese' comment. I'm apt to agree, but it contridicts the notion that recent increases in interest should be read as a good thing. Perhaps American elections are like the supermarket, which will have impulse buys out in the open for the folks who shop that way, and good deals tucked away for the discount shopper. Everyone goes home happy, having found what they want. Perhaps American elections are the same way?
In today's Financial Times Gideon Rachman wrote,
"Foreigners may wonder why the ability to dress a moose or drive your kids to a hockey game is a relevant qualification for the vice-presidency. But the US is quite a successful country. So its voters may not be as bad at picking their leaders as the rest of the world evidently fears."
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/a5995ef6-832c-11dd-907e-000077b07658.html
Post a Comment