| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="FirstPaper" |
|---|
|
| | Thurman Arnold’s The Folklore of Capitalism reminded me of Louis Hartz's explanation for the uniqueness of American political ideology. Hartzian fragment theory posits that the United States, established when an ideological ‘fragment’ detached in opposition to the monarchy, lost the stimulus for ideological change provided by the ‘whole’. |
|
<
< | America’s founders created a nation frozen in time; perpetually confined to an ideological ‘liberal consensus’ rooted in the Revolutionary rhetoric that spurred fragmentation from the British aristocracy. This presents the American ethos as stagnant and bounded. Divorced from an oppositional catalyst, political discourse is confined to the holy trinity of laissez-fair economics, property rights, and individual freedom. |
>
> | America’s founders created a nation frozen in time. The U.S. is perpetually confined to an ideological ‘liberal consensus’ rooted in the Revolutionary rhetoric that spurred fragmentation from the British aristocracy. This presents the American ethos as stagnant and bounded. Divorced from an oppositional catalyst, political discourse is confined to the holy trinity - laissez-fair economics, property rights, and individual freedom. |
| | From Consensus To Creed: A ‘Principled’ Path to Salvation |
|
<
< | The liberal consensus symbolizes American identity to such an extent that it has a quasi-religious persona commanding ritualistic devotion as a prerequisite for social citizenship. |
>
> | The liberal consensus symbolizes American identity. It has taken on a quasi-religious persona, commanding ritualistic devotion as a prerequisite for social citizenship. |
| | Politicians in foreign nations do not characterize opponents as ‘unItalian’ or ‘unCanadian’. Only in the United States has the term ‘unAmerican’ become a fixture in the political vernacular. Candidates are branded as heretics for refusing to conform to the liberal consensus and the canonical Constitution. Anything that interferes with these beliefs – even social welfare or justice – must be sacrificed at the altar of 'Americanism'. |
|
<
< | A few weeks ago I witnessed a physically handicapped man in a NYC Fire Department t-shirt applying for Social Security benefits at an office in Harlem. The image prompted a discussion of the role of individualism and the ‘American Dream’ in modern American politics. A friend and I agreed that libertarian principles and social mobility are valuable for the promotion of ingenuity and innovation. But remaining devoted to these ideals while the disadvantaged struggle on a daily basis is naïve, disheartening, and frankly ‘unAmerican’, if the U.S. prides itself on its image as a global leader and a champion of justice. |
>
> | A few weeks ago I witnessed a physically handicapped man in a NYC Fire Department t-shirt applying for Social Security benefits at an office in Harlem. The image prompted a discussion of the role of individualism and the ‘American Dream’ in modern American politics. A friend and I agreed that libertarian principles and social mobility are valuable for the promotion of ingenuity and innovation. But remaining devoted to these ideals while the disadvantaged struggle on a daily basis is naïve, disheartening, and frankly ‘unAmerican’, if the U.S. prides itself on its image as a global leader in human rights and a champion of justice. |
| | While the American ethos is valuable political currency for the sense of patriotism and belonging it instills in American citizens, pious adherence to the vague principles embodied in the ‘liberal consensus’ can serve to constrain public welfare, necessary institutional challenge and national growth. |
| | But we must also recognize that the comfort provided by blind faith and fear of disillusionment and uncertainty can stifle creativity, imagination and improvement. Only then can we move forward to create complex composites that more accurately reflect reality, enabling us to engage dynamically with society and effect substantive change. |
|
<
< | Word Count (921)
It seems to me that the work of revision paid off. You've gotten
more clarity and somewhat better accessibility from the editing.
Even more ruthlessness in taming the length of sentences and
paragraphs will help you further in future.
Your synthesis of the Realists we read has given you a counterweight
for your theoretical adventurousness, so that the man applying for
SSD "prompt[s]" you "to discuss the role of individualism and the
‘American Dream’ in modern American politics." I'm
reminded of Robinson's defusing what he learned in combat into a
theory for reconciling freedom and the state. The road should work
the other way as well, of course: discussion of Citizens United
should prompt you to think about the man applying for disability
benefits. Our opportunism might also be described as our occasional
ability to relate to the constant struggle for dignified, healthy,
secure life being waged by people all around us. "The poorest he
that is in England has a life to live as the greatest he," said
Colonel Rainborough, as the Puritan Army tried to define the shape of
Republican England, in 1650. All the structures we manipulate, all
the mechanisms of social process in which we intervene, are either
friendly or hostile commentary on that basic proposition.
|
>
> | Word Count (924) |
| | |