|
Ray, thanks
for posting Samuelson’s piece on polarization. I agree with several of his
points about manipulating public perception, but wish that he had found a
source newer than 1999 (Wolfe, One Nation,
After All) that cited
more than just middle class families. Much has changed since then. Generally, in
the larger scope of society we do have more cultural diversification and
acceptance of things that were once less visible and familiar, racial and
religious intermarriage, gay partnerships, to name a few. Nevertheless, Samuelson does a
disservice by leaving the impression that polarization is mostly a creation of
intellectual or media elites vying for public attention. History is
full of examples of turbulent times resulting in creative solutions, and just
as many examples of turbulence leading to great disarray. We need to be alert,
not complacent, and Samuelson’s effort to discount polarization as more
contrived than it is may lull many into ignoring vital issues that are shaping
our nation in the new century. When the public is apathetic and not involved,
someone WILL make the decision for them. Samuelson’s
point that opponents maximize their differences to establish themselves as
viable is of course true. There are hot
button issues that still raise funds, generate good media coverage
and get applause/boos with targeted audiences and there will always be
opportunists who take advantage. Let’s take one
of those hot buttons: Andrew
Sullivan, also known to generate some controversy for his opinions and the way
he has hurled them at opponents in the past, discusses The GOP Divide on Gay Marriage
in yesterday’s WP. He identifies some
within the GOP who differ here and explains why he thinks the President will be
silent on this issue, citing poll weakness
(see below). Even if I
opposed gays having the same legal rights in civil unions that straights do in civil
unions, I would not favor a constitutional amendment because the less we tinker
with the Constitution the better, one area where George Will and I agree. On
this issue it is my opinion that the Polarizing
Right feels it necessary to go for the ‘holy grail’ of legitimacy with
a Constitutional amendment to establish their supremacy of preferred principles
because they are losing the “battle” of righteousness in the public domain and
the courts. If gay rights
is the “new slavery” issue some people are going to find themselves
increasingly isolated and marginalized as the courts rule in consistency with
the Constitution, as they did after the Civil War, and during the Civil Rights
and women’s movements. Hence the
zealous battle cry to amend it. - KWC * Excerpt: “Polls show the public much more evenly
divided now than it once was on marriage for gays. In Massachusetts, the most
recent polls even show a majority for it: 50 percent to 39 percent. Nationally,
37 percent now support it, with 55 percent against, according to a recent ABC
News poll. But when you ask the 55 percent
opposed whether they would go so far as to amend the Constitution to ban such
marriages, only 36 percent say yes. That amounts to 20 percent of the entire electorate. Most
constitutional amendments, even those with overwhelming public support, fail.
What chance is there for one to succeed with a mere 20 percent?” |
