The Closing of the American Mind

Compulsory attendance at a polling station, with an option to indicate "none of the candidates, " would do a great deal to improve the U.S. participation in the national election. Failure to participate should be punished by a fine. I know that our libertarian brothers and sisters will scream, but we should ask them for a better, more efficient way to improve voter participation in our country.

Yeah, I would like to respond to the lazy journalism that accompanied Mr, Thomas' article as well as those who are trying to tear down Lou Dobbs because they don't want anyone to have heroes. Contrary to Mr. Thomas' statement, people like me are nowhere near the divided individuals that he makes us out to be, but we do have disagreements here and there. It's just that mere disagreements don't really boost ratings or sell publications. There is a lot of lazy and smarmy journalism in this type of magazine (I don't usually read it, except that my aunt and uncle had a copy of it and I do feel the need to respond). Right now, we have what Lee Iacocca describes in his recent book as a "conqueror's mentality", where Americans tend to lose all sorts of humility because they won something here and there, and become lazy and/or mean-spirited in their criticism and give tired lectures to others. The majority of people like me are moderates and independents, not those who tune in to these various talk shows and tend to have fringier viewpoints. I resent this notion that all people like me do is watch "Girls Gone Wild" or play XBOX all day. That's a blatant misrepresentation of us and limits our options. We may not be protesting in the streets or flaggelate at the top of our lungs, but we are active politically (especially Gen-X'ers like myself who are dismissed as mere slackers. We're not. We just happen to be low-key).

Good article; however, there are a couple missing pieces to this article. One is the apparent lack of knowledge of how our American government works by a good portion of our electorate - young and old alike. The second is the Lou Dobbs effect. They go hand in hand. Lou Dobbs of CNN calls the the whole Congress but especially the Democrats ineffective after the American public chased the conservatives/near-reactionaries from control of both houses of Congress. Now every time some consensus is achieve in Congress now dominated by Democrates who are not all liberal, our darkly conservative President vetoes decent legislation. So certainly Mr. Thomas's evaluation is descriptive of how things are, but things are not as bleak as they seem. I think we will have a good turnout for this upcoming election.

Division is a good thing - it creates clear choices. Disinterest is, in its own way, also good. Disinterested people should not participate. If they can't be bothered to make an informed choice, then the choice they make can only be a wrong one.

What took you so long to write this column.? This subject was long overdue.

M L " Mike " Waller

Its easy and fair to institute a Draft for 2%, chosen randomly from all 21 year olds male and female,no exceptions/deferments for two year service. The drafted could have the choise of a public service ( CCC type for infastructure etc ) and Military service. A lucrative after service education,benifit,reward and industry level pay for the Military and 'CCC type' carreer minded would make this even fairer. I believe that this would help bring back a focus on many US and global relations issues that go ignored like this article suggests

Its easy and fair to institute a Draft for 2%, chosen randomly from all 21 year olds male and female,no exceptions/deferments for two year service. The drafted could have the choise of a public service ( CCC type for infastructure etc ) and Military service. A lucrative after service education,benifit,reward and industry level pay for the Military and 'CCC type' carreer minded would make this even fairer. I believe that this would help bring back a focus on many US and global relations issues that go ignored like this article suggests

Given the choice between the so-called moderates of Joe Lieberman or partisanship, at this point in history, I???ll take partisanship. If moderates don???t like it and refuse to vote, I say, boo-freaken-hoo. It???s the so-called moderate that voted for Bush, not once, but twice, because he was ???the kind of guy you could have a beer with?????? (huh?) If that???s the kind of judgment we can expect from those who vote for their leadership, they can stay home!!!!!!!

Also, I find it interesting that articles like this always seem to be a plea from the Reich for liberals to stop fighting so hard, a ???leave Brittney alone??? squealing-like-a-pig plea, because they know they???re going to have their asses handed to them.

???Have compassion for the poor-poor rabid right, they know not what they do!???

B*llSh*t!!!

The right set the stage when Grover Norquist said, ???Bi-partisanship is akin to date-rape.??? It wasn???t true when he said it, but it is today. For the Reich to *** about it now does nothing except give me warm tingles.

And, for those so-called moderates who I blame most for the mess we???re in, either take an interest in your country, or stay home. No one needs the least informed making decisions for the rest of us. Bush has proven that it???s neither a virtue, nor patriotic, it???s just stupid.

The long arc that governs command and control institutions marks a decline with the dismissal of a challenge to the status quo as a small act of chaotic origin and surreptitious ambitions; as the challenge becomes worthy it leads to hand wringing and internal debate, the institution exposes its inner vulnerabilities and begin its slow and inexorable demise. Replaced in time by a greater, more prolific institution. I need not repeat middle school history lessons here but it seems that Mr. Thomas' woeful yearning for the days of centralized political media with its sensible and hypereducated gatekeepers (oh wait, Mr. Thomas is a proud heir to their traditions) is both retrospective and entirely short of any prescription of what to do with the future we actually face. The democratization of any institution is chaotic and prone to violent motions that offend the sensibilities of the guardians of the established order. But inevitably it works. The narrowcasting phenomenon so succinctly dismissed by the author and his experts has mortally wounded the traditional publishing industry, will very soon do the same to the traditional broadcasting industry (and all traditional media for that matter) and has now set its sites on the realm of politics. The political systems of today will within two or three decades be subsumed by a more flexible and responsive method of governing. Elected representatives will become that, nothing more than grocery clerks executing the orders of the constituents. Politics are like news, ultimately its all local. So unedited, unsynthesized, unobjectified information is disseminated to the people, they will decide, not "their leadership" chosen once every four years based on some hazy conceptual platform. Less issues will be sent to the House to be debated endlessly but crafted in silence by zealous staffers who more interest in how to get summer houses in Nantucket than the substance of that bill they are drafting. Policy debate will not be left to the talking heads and their barking dogs on the Sunday cable shows, or to the erudite journals and their genteel (and not so genteel) sponsors.
It will be a robust breath of fresh air when America realizes it does not need to outsource its governance. So this is not about the moderates standing up and making their voice heard, its about accelerating plurality, embracing everyone no matter how fringe who wants their voice to be heard, making more information available, faster, more reliably and more accessible, upending the system and making it more chaotic and messy and possibly more productive. Otherwise our grandchildren will be adding the US example to their own middle school history lessons. Sorry Mr. Thomas, I know that you want us to all pipe down and let you and your anointed brethren tell us what is the right and reasonable thing to do. We do not wish you any ill feelings; I think you are a voice that is both wise and judicious. But yesterday was yesterday.

The long arc that governs command and control institutions marks a decline with the dismissal of a challenge to the status quo as a small act of chaotic origin and surreptitious ambitions; as the challenge becomes worthy it leads to hand wringing and internal debate, the institution exposes its inner vulnerabilities and begin its slow and inexorable demise. Replaced in time by a greater, more prolific institution. I need not repeat middle school history lessons here but it seems that Mr. Thomas' woeful yearning for the days of centralized political media with its sensible and hypereducated gatekeepers (oh wait, Mr. Thomas is a proud heir to their traditions) is both retrospective and entirely short of any prescription of what to do with the future we actually face. The democratization of any institution is chaotic and prone to violent motions that offend the sensibilities of the guardians of the established order. But inevitably it works. The narrowcasting phenomenon so succinctly dismissed by the author and his experts has mortally wounded the traditional publishing industry, will very soon do the same to the traditional broadcasting industry (and all traditional media for that matter) and has now set its sites on the realm of politics. The political systems of today will within two or three decades be subsumed by a more flexible and responsive method of governing. Elected representatives will become that, nothing more than grocery clerks executing the orders of the constituents. Politics are like news, ultimately its all local. So unedited, unsynthesized, unobjectified information is disseminated to the people, they will decide, not "their leadership" chosen once every four years based on some hazy conceptual platform. Less issues will be sent to the House to be debated endlessly but crafted in silence by zealous staffers who more interest in how to get summer houses in Nantucket than the substance of that bill they are drafting. Policy debate will not be left to the talking heads and their barking dogs on the Sunday cable shows, or to the erudite journals and their genteel (and not so genteel) sponsors.
It will be a robust breath of fresh air when America realizes it does not need to outsource its governance. So this is not about the moderates standing up and making their voice heard, its about accelerating plurality, embracing everyone no matter how fringe who wants their voice to be heard, making more information available, faster, more reliably and more accessible, upending the system and making it more chaotic and messy and possibly more productive. Otherwise our grandchildren will be adding the US example to their own middle school history lessons. Sorry Mr. Thomas, I know that you want us to all pipe down and let you and your anointed brethren tell us what is the right and reasonable thing to do. We do not wish you any ill feelings; I think you are a voice that is both wise and judicious. But yesterday was yesterday.

Just more (refutable) CW, illustrating the imperial city cocktail party mentality which passes for a political press in this country.

Just more (refutable) CW, illustrating the imperial city cocktail party mentality which passes for a political press in this country.

I think you're dead on, and this is essentially why I support Barack Obama.

He made the same argument you're making here in The Audacity Of Hope- that while politicians and the media get wrapped up in their own petty arguments and analysis, most Americans are busy not paying attention and trying to make ends meet. He also makes the argument that, as Americans, we agree about a lot more than we don't, but conflict plays better in the news and on the stump, and that this truth is central to his governing philosophy.

He also made another argument- that the vacuum of power created by so much political apathy is to blame for the control special interest groups have over politics, and that changing the tone and getting regular people more engaged in their Democracy might fix this.

In a primary that will be dominated by fierce partisans, this message hasn't played well. It's been spun by everyone and turned into "Obama says he'll beat those evil, bloodsucking Republicans by playing nice, but WE KNOW WE HAVE TO KILL THEM WITH KNIVES TO SAVE AMERICA!"

I suspect this is why so many Republicans and Independents (self included) support him, and I believe that should he manage to get this message across in a compelling way, he will be our next president.

Utter nonsense, Mr. Thomas. Voting rates stank in the late '80s, well before Limbaugh and his ilk started poisoning the well, and before those terrible blogs. And i love your tsake on that "big tent" the Democrats had in the sainted old days. Roomy renough for Sen. Eastland and his talk of 'unbearably stinking Negroes," and all. Those were the days. You Beltway navel-gazers kill me. I realize people who care about what's happening to our country would simply ruin the chit-chat at your dinner parties, but too freaking bad. Say hello to Broder for me.

We likes to be stupid. We like to know how we FEEL, and how everyone FEELS. We don't like egg-heads - they make our head hurt, what with all their statistics, facts, nuance, and such like. Just like Dub-a, Amur'ca does not like too think to much an-e-MOR.
Bread and F-ing circuses (and exported war), Baby!! Rome probably was not demolished in a day, either.

According to Mr. Thomas, he is turned off by "hyper-partisanship." I understand. It's all my fault and the fault of people like me who care too much. If only we could be calm, relaxed and understand that nothing serious is going on here, things would be nice. Everyone would be happy. The turned off would feel comfortable and participate once again. We are at a loss to know what these calm gradually once again tuned in would want to vote about anyway but it would be a good thing.
Being the thwarted and twisted soul I am, I get deeply concerned that our liberties are being torn away. That makes me emotional and a devastating turn off to the moderates who would get out there and participate if it weren't for me. The ugly person that I am is concerned that our government through its mismanagement may have caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands in an unnecessary war. But that's no reason for me to become politically involved and to get upset. After all God grows new people all the time. And didn't Scrooge reflect on the importance of limiting the surplus population anyway? I could mention the economy and the sub prime melt down but I've been annoying enough.
Strangely enough, I am a student of history and I can't seem to find any place in history where there moderate middle ever got anything started. The American Revolution, abolition, women's rights, civil rights, ending the Vietnam War, etc. This always seemed to be the result of committed idealogues who kept turning off all the regular guys who just pretty much can't put up with us.
You know I bet that there are writers for major news magazines, and I bet with their inside knowledge of what's going on, they are really upset by what's going on in this country today. I bet they glory in their role as defenders of the American experiment in democracy and human rights. I bet they are ready to fight as crusading journalist have always fought - for the little guy. Oh but no! It appears they have found real wisdom in encouraging us to be calm. Thanks! I realize how wrong I was to believe that you belt way media types had no concern for the common good. Obviously your deep concern for my welfare and that of my country led you to try to make me stay away from activism. After all, it's just a nation and a people and shared responsibility in brotherhood. What's to get concerned about? Once again I thank you for your idealism and hard work.

Thomas quotes Cass Sunstein. Readers might like this quote from Cass Sunstein. Sunstein is discussing the Supreme Court but really you could apply it to our political climat in general:

"...[W]hat was once on the extreme right is now merely conservative. What was once conservative is now centrist. What was centrist is now left wing. What was once on the left no longer exists. The political right has had a strong interest in downplaying these changes. "

http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=the_myth_of_the_balanced_court

The "Bipartisanship" that Evans means, is giving Republicans a change to catch their breath before the next big push to the right. Considering how far we've already gone in that direction, this would be like calling time out -- on our own ten yard line.