Election day is probably the only day that brings more relief than Christmas. And for pretty much the same reason: a protracted, half-insane process has finally ended.
From an individual's point of view, both Christmas and presidential elections represent a marvelous opportunity to practice mental hygiene, by ignoring these two seasons as much as possible. If you do a good job at that, you have accomplished a lot more than by downsizing physical clutter in your life.
It's possible that I am fooling myself about how well I've performed this mental downsizing over the last 18 (?) months of the presidential election cycle. Very well then, at least I'll do a good job on election day.
Today's project will be the ultimate downsizing project. I will spend the day reading Benjamin Constant's "Political Principles." He seems rather forgotten today. A real shame. So far his book has been interesting and easy to read. For the most part it is an attack on Rousseau's Social Contract as the great error of modern philosophy. Rousseau believed in the unconditional surrender of an Individual's rights to the mysterious and abstract "General Will" in a democracy. He believed in the unlimited power of democratic sovereignty.
But by reading an important and fundamental book on election day, rather than by following the blow-by-blow accounts of the horse race as presented by the clowns on television, an individual can show that they have not surrendered.
From an individual's point of view, both Christmas and presidential elections represent a marvelous opportunity to practice mental hygiene, by ignoring these two seasons as much as possible. If you do a good job at that, you have accomplished a lot more than by downsizing physical clutter in your life.
It's possible that I am fooling myself about how well I've performed this mental downsizing over the last 18 (?) months of the presidential election cycle. Very well then, at least I'll do a good job on election day.
Today's project will be the ultimate downsizing project. I will spend the day reading Benjamin Constant's "Political Principles." He seems rather forgotten today. A real shame. So far his book has been interesting and easy to read. For the most part it is an attack on Rousseau's Social Contract as the great error of modern philosophy. Rousseau believed in the unconditional surrender of an Individual's rights to the mysterious and abstract "General Will" in a democracy. He believed in the unlimited power of democratic sovereignty.
But by reading an important and fundamental book on election day, rather than by following the blow-by-blow accounts of the horse race as presented by the clowns on television, an individual can show that they have not surrendered.
I went for a hike to blow the political stink off my brain. Highly recommended.
ReplyDeleteGood way to put it.
DeleteI've been watching Gunsmoke reruns to avoid the political BS!!
ReplyDeleteIt is important not to get caught up in the immediate stuff and instead to step back and look at it as a moment in history. As has been stated before by many much smarter than I, democracy is messy. If you don't want messy, then you want an autocrat. Don't think we want that.
ReplyDeleteFor myself, I intend to read up on Andrew Jackson who fought like the soldier he was for the America he believed in. You know, we've lost something when we stopped choosing our leaders from our military ranks and instead made career politicians who only know words. As our society changed from rural to urban and our economy became more and more based on consumerism, the modern day businessman is now our new soldier figure.
Don't get me wrong, he scares me and I'm sure that's a normal reaction to any maverick that comes along. (Sarah Palin, eat your heart out.)
George
State governorships are a good training ground for presidents.
DeleteYes, it is time to wash off the dust of daily politics and look at the historical big picture. That might be the next post or two.
Democratic elections change government office holders and
Deletepolicies. Often the changes in policies represent a change of
emphasis. Sometimes they are more significant but not so drastic
that the defeated party cannot readily accept them at least until the
next election. But occasionally political parties in democratic
regimes become deeply and bitterly opposed to each other because
the parties are convinced that their opponents threaten to abandon
the country’s most fundamental principles.
When political parties have these extreme differences, how
can civil war be avoided? Can we reasonably expect those in
power before the elections peacefully to surrender their offices to
opponents who they know will pursue policies that are not only
unwise or unjust but also wholly destructive of the very ends of
the political community? Should the government of the day
respect the election results, and quietly hand over power to such
traitors? Or, if it is the challenging party that has lost the election,
should it be content to leave peacefully in office people who are
not just partisan opponents with disagreeable policies, but
dangerous enemies of the country who do not deserve to be
considered as legitimate governing officials? And what if the
election result was very close, and perhaps also included (as is
generally the way with close elections) some very contestable
counting of the votes? Why should either a governing or a
challenging party accept an unfavorable election outcome
determined by a few doubtfully legitimate vote counts, when such
important principles are at stake? - FROM BULLETS TO BALLOTS
This is a test of anonymous commenters.
Delete