Basilica and Beck

Well, I just had an absolutely magical evening with my lovely girlfriend at the Cathedral Basilica in St. Louis. Her professor's choir, the Tenebrae English Chamber Choir, performed and they were spectacular. The sounds reverberated so wonderfully off of the walls and to be in the presence of such beautiful artwork and Christian iconography... I had goosebumps for most of the evening. I just wish that the pews had been a little more comfortable. Half of the time I was thinking about how much my back hurt... But regardless of the minor pains, the concert was wonderful.

I, on the other hand, have felt miserable the last few days. Stomach flu, I think/hope. I feel better now, but who knows if that will last or if I will get back to school on Monday.


However, I have had a chance to think about one of the most frustrating people that I am aware of: Glenn Beck. Now, I am a little ashamed of the passionate rage this man can inspire in me. And perhaps it isn't even him. I think it may be more that he is incredibly popular and people seem to buy his message. Maybe they don't, but it is clear that he is very high profile and his words are reaching a lot of people. I want to keep my comments brief and concise because otherwise this will be 12 pages long. As a little appetizer to my main comments I wanted to say that I am saddened by people on the left that publish posts or comments about Beck the dabble in the same kind of name-calling that Beck loves. Calling Beck a "right-wing nut job" or a "crazy conspiracy theories" may be fair, but in the effort to inspire civil discourse, ultimately self-defeating. Clean it up, ladies and gentlemen. Attack the issues. You will win every time. There is little to no truth on his side. Point out his hypocrisy and lack of evidence, don't resort to cheap insults. It may feel good, but it just continues the bickering. OK...

1. I had a great conversation with my high school AP Literature teacher about the "Beckites" and racism toward the President. She put it in an interesting light that I may have thought of, but the way she said it made me think differently. In a white supremacist, patriarchal, capitalist culture, where rich, white men are privileged, "other" categories are not supposed to be in charge. Also, we have many images of African Americans in our popular culture that depict black men as bafoons, lazy, screw-ups, and foolish individuals. The way she put it sort of brought these two ideas together. The fear and anger towards the government may in part be driven by the fact that the President has made some ambitious decisions on policy with long-term impacts, and white America may be afraid that a black man will screw it up? To be clear, I'm not suggesting that all criticism of President Obama is racist, but the type of reactionary, appeal-to-my-great-great-grandchildren rhetoric, and apocalyptic conspiracy theories really does suggest that some of the criticism is people being worried about Obama "screwing the pooch."

2. On conspiracy theories, I think that this is where Beck has shown that he can really draw in the crowd. And I think that the proliferation of these ideas is a product of the dysfunctional democracy, not because Barack Hussein Obama is a fascist, communist, or a Muslim. Let's face it: if people believed that their voice in government was as strong as corporate money, then people would not need conspiracy theories. If people thought that they could organize and lobby for legislation that made their lives better, their communities better, people wouldn't need to think that OnStar was going to be used against them. If people believed that government was really of the people, by the people, and for the people, people would be more focused on researching solutions, calling their senators, and drafting legislation. We as a country have become cynical. We want to find reasons that explain why the government won't work for us and we resort to wild stories about FEMA detention camps and mandatory abortions. I think a lot of these fears go back to my racism bit. The fear are also just generally related to the rhetoric of "change." But I do think this craziness of Beck is a sort of escapism for people to sit back and rationalize why they should not care about government and explain why government does not work. Well, as long as Beck and the rest of Fox News staff have Americans lulled into this state, Murdoch and the gang will keep consolidating their media outlets, buying up interests, and continue to ensure their profitability with corporatist legislation.


So I guess the moral of the story is Glenn Beck makes me think a lot! HA! Anyway, seriously. We could all stand a little more time reading information like the actual text of a bill or speech, and a little less time listening to "pundits" or editorials. Go make your own decisions. It's the terrible burden of freedom and it's wonderful.

Frustration

I really don't know where to start with this one. I sort of touched on this subjects in some previous posts about health care and the angry, derogatory, fact-less, conservative protesting. There are two articles on NPR that I read this evening before I went to bed that made me sit up and got my blood boiling...

One of them was about how the Obama Administration wants to take the "Public-Option" off the table, or in their words, they will be open to compromise.

And the second article was basically some analysis of the current political situation for the Obama Administration and why they have had so much traction in gaining public support for their initiatives

Now first of all, I have no problem with a compromise. Compromise is healthy and should be expected, especially with the American political context. And the compromise actually may have some kick to it: Consumer-owned cooperatives as health insurers. Non-profit health care, even if it is private sector, is better than the for-profit arena. Will it lower costs? Will it get more people insured? Will it facilitate the ultimate goal of having a healthier, more efficient society? Will it produce more moral outcomes? Maybe.

But the part that steams me up is the fact that these outlandish protests seem to be the cause of all of this vision-alteration. Again, I understand that people have legitimate qualms with the current health care reform, I have my own. And in a republican democracy, it is the people who are sovereign and ultimately it is their opinions that determine what policy is acceptable. But there are two problems with that. I feel like most of the debate has been focused on disproving the myths about what the ACTUAL legislation, plan, and current system looked like. Institutions, like NPR for example, ran several stories that corrected common dissatisfactions with "ObamaCare" (as it has been infamously dubbed). So this begs the questions: Has the protest been based on legitimate concern or based on lies or misconceptions?

This whole town hall show-down has been absurd. I just don't even know where to begin. Where I come from, it is polite to ask questions, firmly expect answers, and respectfully disagree. There is no need for name-calling or apocalyptic descriptions of an America that is chained to the dogma of socialistic nihilism that is breaded with carbon-neutral, Fair Trade coffee rinds and fascist flavored handouts. The point is is that most doomsayers have little to no interest in promoting the democratic dialouge; they wish to complain about how fascist Communists have infiltrated America and we should all shiver in our shoes. I feel like the McCarthy metaphor is a tired one, but perhaps this is an appropriate to an extent.

I could go on about poorly informed rants, but I won't. I want to touch on two other things that I had never really thought about until I was really mad about how people were talking, acting, and pretending to be Thomas Paine (I really don't like you, Mr. Beck).

One thing is that I never realized how ridiculous it is to claim that a President is fundamentally challenging the core of "American Values". Now, look, I will be the first to tell you that President Bush was absolutely morally indefensible with the warrentless wiretapping, illegal detentions, torture, and a whole host of other offenses (uhh did I forget WMD's and Iraq?). But the point is is that in the end, claiming to have a handle on the core of American values turns out to mostly be partisan rhetoric. American values are sometimes contradictory and very complex. So while it does feel nice to be on one's high horse when we see a moral transgression, it is important to remember in American politics there are sets of values that can contradict one's beliefs and still maintain their "Americanness". Again, not defending the likes of the Cheney/Rumsfeld. Just something to chew on.

And secondly, I find it very distrubing the large pharmacutical companies were fully supportive of President Obama's health care overhaul. They, in fact, were throwing PR money at this deal! Retail giants like Wal-Mart were also supportive. This makes me very skeptical. When big business is happy, there is reason to doubt to what extent the proposed legislation will actually benefit the broader society and not concentrate wealth in elite hands. I think faithful Obamaites and progressive Democrats should seriously look at who is behind this plan before defending it to the death. While the attacks from the neo-Tea Partyers may be harsh, it might not be such a bad idea to see why major pharmacuticals are behind the plan. What do they stand to gain?

OK, well I tried to keep this short but it wasn't. I apologize.