Thread: The Politics Of Anger

Heard this on the radio today. It's about 11 minutes, and includes a push for Sasha Abramsky's book, but I think they do a good job of identifying a problem in our domestic politics.

The Politics Of Anger : NPR
It can be streamed or downloaded as an MP3

The "Look Ahead in Anger" article is here: Look Ahead in Anger - The Chronicle Review - The Chronicle of Higher Education

Yet while the rage in some ways transcends politics, in important ways it is deeply rooted in contemporary conservatism. Indeed, if Islamic terrorism is the outward manifestation of a civil war within Islam between modernists and advocates of a notional, romanticized "purity," as is frequently posited, the season of rage that American domestic politics has entered is to a large extent the externalization of a battle of ideas inside one part of the polity. Within the conservative movement—which has, in many ways over the past 40-plus years, provided the intellectual backdrop against which American political discourse has developed and the linguistic tools with which we now define and debate our political choices—there is a growing schism over the role of government in American life. As a result, anger over big government and the incumbents alleged to have brought it into being is sweeping across party lines.

Originally Posted by ShawneeMoon

Thanks for the links. I saved them to read tomorrow. I've worked on homework all day and am brain dead at the moment lol

Your homework or the kids? I'm a little frazzled myself.

Originally Posted by ShawneeMoon

Mine. She gets a summer break, I don't lol

What is that saying about no rest for the wicked?!

BTW, did you get a chance to read the article or listen to the NPR segment?

I do believe that American democratic institutions are particularly durable and resilient. But it is at least possible to envision a scenario in which, after years of high unemployment and declining living standards, the Tea Party essentially takes over the GOP. And it is possible to see how, over a series of election cycles, that movement could plant a brand of extremism in the center of American politics that would fundamentally change America's identity. It would very likely be characterized by a series of negatives: being anti-intellectual, anti-foreign, blustering in its assertion of an increasingly fragile American superiority, unwilling to engage with the rest of the world on environmental policy, nuclear disarmament, or human rights. A tapestry of rage defined by what its practitioners oppose rather than support.

Is it just me or does this remind you of the Khmer Rouge? They were very anti-intellectual and xenophobic too.