People often say we are a country of laws, which is true. However, we are also a country of norms, behaviors society recognized as leading to a more harmonious society. Those norms started decaying in the 1990s and now we live in a world (to paraphrase Daniel Patrick Moynihan) where deviance is perpetually being defined down. Behaviors…
People often say we are a country of laws, which is true. However, we are also a country of norms, behaviors society recognized as leading to a more harmonious society. Those norms started decaying in the 1990s and now we live in a world (to paraphrase Daniel Patrick Moynihan) where deviance is perpetually being defined down. Behaviors that would have been abhorrent 10 years ago are tolerated, even embraced. We should not be surprised at the chaos in the House or the behavior of January 6th--once the norms were thrown out, everything became possible and allowable.
It isn't the norms so much as the total lack of decent character in those elected to office these days. The norms exist because people of character agree in principle to adhere to them. That is out the window with MAGgot politics.
This is the kind of statement one used to see in conservative media and from GOP politicians constantly. Not only were they proven right, but they were mostly the ones to do it.
That's not just ironic, it's weird. Sure, you can construct a hindsight story why. Or you can tell me they were evil hypocrites all along. (Yawn.) Their worst enemies and critics predicted The Handmaids Tale and/or a U.S. version of Pinochet, but never the Jerry Springer show.
The Newt-ster was the one who brought norm breaking to the spotlight in the House and that behavior quickly moved to the Senate. Members respond to incentives and cable news--and much later social media--completely changed the incentive structure.
Norms can be good or bad--like everything else. It depends upon what the norms are. Some behaviors from 10 years or longer ago are now abhorrent (and rightfully so).
Norms divide as well as unify. Norms often get in the way of the advancement of civilization and actually have to be destroyed. Many stateless societies are prisoners to their norms (by which I mean that these norms actually oppress significant sections of the population (like women) and keep the population in poverty.
We have willfully destroyed the norms around politics in this country in pursuit of power (and of profit by the media). Part of this is intentional on the part of the people involved--but it happened because FAR too many people took things for granted or simply did not pay attention.
As I said in a post yesterday, far too many of these people are unthoughtful and will destroy civilization because they do not understand how it works, how fragile it is, or how stupid they are being in return for short term gains or (in the case of McCarthy) not much of anything at all.
"No raindrop feels responsible for the flood"! Fabulous quote!
I agree that it is the Stupid Caucus that is destroying the Republic. Unthoughtful. Lacking understanding. But also lacking any interest in learning or doing their job (also true of Trump himself). But it began with the Greed of the Gingrich Faction and was intentional and has continued through to the MAGgot Caucus (now half divorced from Trump) which includes the McCarthy's and McConnells and all GOPers in between imho. It may be fun to watch the MTGs and Boeberts spit at each other and McCarthy go down to a humiliating non-win. But they are two sides of the same filthy coin. That may be what saves the Republic.
As a 70 year old female, I have benefited immensely from the destruction of the norms that governed women’s lives when I was growing up. I now live with a level of freedom I never could have imagined as an 18 year old. So the whole discussion about the value of norms is complicated.
One thing the Trump years taught us, in an unfortunate way, is the surprising fact that many gears in our federal functioning are based on norms, not laws. When there’s a brigade of Republicans who don’t even follow laws (like holding campaign events on the White House grounds), what power does a flimsy norm (like releasing presidential tax records) have?
Excellent point! But a very sad one! When you have to have a law to make people barely civil, you may be in trouble. And I think we do need laws requiring candidates to have some kind of basic knowledge if not values or morals or character or integrity. For starters.
Exactly. Norms are complicated, but I'd be happy if we could enforce existing laws. If we ever get to that point, where we punish lawbreaking, then we can start looking to shore up norms.
Nor snowflake for the avalanche. The more things change, the more they stay the same. Thoughtfulness and thinking are two distinct things, with people engaging in too much of the latter and not nearly enough of the former. I think.
Rodin's statue not necessarily a tribute to the human race.
See...QED...Just shot my mouth off here without giving it a second thought.
I think there were a lot of people who destroyed norms willingly, happily, joyfully, and purposefully. Look at how McConnell got the Supreme Court he wanted, who willingly, happily, joyfully, and purposefully went straight for the right to privacy in this country. And if we don't confront this, say that people like McConnell were not just wrong but should not be allowed to continue to lead this country, well, we'll go on purposefully skipping our way into fascism.
I do think that in any other country on earth, Trump would have been hauled off in handcuffs two years ago (as the sane persons in the WH expected) and McCarthy and the rest of them would have been hauled out by the hair and jailed for helping the insurrectionists. People at the Top should be in jail now! "Only in America, land of the foolish!"
Re right to privacy, it’s in the South Carolina constitution and the SC Supreme Court ruled the 6 weeks law re abortion violated that right - something like that.
Gen-Zers were the indifferent generation: too busy to critique the generations before or after them. They just went with the flow, which wasn't exactly a good thing since it was a continuation of what Boomers had put in place.
Like, no way. That was the establishment that we rebelled against - turned on, tuned in and dropped out to avoid. We became folk singers and feminists, social activists and journalists, rebels with a cause and enthusiastic anti-antidisestablishmentists. But then came the eighties and so many of our fellow anti-war protesters decided to work for Wall Street and it was the age of greed. And we had kids. You can take one baby to a protest but two gets difficult. So blame it all on boomers if it makes you feel good but acknowledge that you kind of like equal pay for work of equal value, the end of the war in VietNam, rights for women and LGBTQ+2Setc, equal marriage rights, the end of segregation, and I could go on. We like to think there was progress on many fronts and now our grandkids are blaming us for offshoring manufacturing when we had no input in that and a lot of other stupid decisions. But don’t worry - we’re dying off and will soon be out of your way. Your welcome.
I don't like blaming generations for this or that, but I think you may be taking a bit too much credit for some of the above.
Rosa Parks refused to move when the oldest Boomer was 9. The Freedom Rides were when the oldest were just getting into high school.
I'll give you Vietnam and Women's rights, but LGBTQ... well, Ellen didn't exactly get open arms in 1997, Don't ask Don't tell was the best compromise that could be reached in the late 90's, and DOMA was also in the late 90's with a boomer President. Greatest was fading then, but boomers were the biggest chunk of the electorate. We can blame the Silent, they won't make a peep.
Again, I don't get into blaming generations and obviously there are wide swings within generations. People act like the hippies all just changed overnight into Reaganites, but that's generally not what happened. The Okies from Muskogee became Reaganites and the hippies just mellowed a bit into more classical liberals.
You’re right that boomers built on a continuum started many years before. You could go back many decades on feminism as well as civil rights and non-cis rights and pacifism and any of the issues and those battles are still being waged today along with a whole lot more. The children of the sixties didn’t invent dissent. Every generation has its time in the sun. My grandchildren will fight different but related battles. But I do get a little peeved at boomer blaming and wanted to rant for a bit. At least we’re not talking about Kevin.
I thought that piece identified a problem but not its origins. Talk radio, cable news, and social media have all made politics "interesting" for profit by generating outrage, targeted with ever-increasing techical efficiency for a segmented audience. Blaming Hollywood, celebrity PSAs, and MTV completely misses the mark.
I read it and if you get rid of the first part I think he actually frames our current situation pretty well. I am in my mid 50s and can remember back when politicians were trying not trying to be celebrities and social media stars. Getting things done for the people you represent was a bigger factor than getting likes. I'm still on the fence about what helped Clinton win, being on Arsenio or the little Perot guy. Getting people to vote is a good thing but they also need to learn that there is more than just pulling the lever and that just because they got "their guy" elected things don't magically get better. I really liked one of the descriptions of Masto of Nevada on The Focus Group podcast. She's a work horse not a show horse. I will take representation from someone who gets results over one that is merely looking for attention. When I looked at it from this point of view I found it to be a little more relative how we got here.
That's why I found it so frustrating. He has some excellent points about talk radio, social media, and cable news, but he really didn't want to blame the flamethrowers, so he blamed the 1990s, the last time he remembered outreach to voters he didn't like.
Oof, I read that piece of crooked intellectual dishonesty. God knows how much the Washington Post and the National Review pay for blatant propaganda like that. I miss reporters.
People often say we are a country of laws, which is true. However, we are also a country of norms, behaviors society recognized as leading to a more harmonious society. Those norms started decaying in the 1990s and now we live in a world (to paraphrase Daniel Patrick Moynihan) where deviance is perpetually being defined down. Behaviors that would have been abhorrent 10 years ago are tolerated, even embraced. We should not be surprised at the chaos in the House or the behavior of January 6th--once the norms were thrown out, everything became possible and allowable.
It isn't the norms so much as the total lack of decent character in those elected to office these days. The norms exist because people of character agree in principle to adhere to them. That is out the window with MAGgot politics.
This is the kind of statement one used to see in conservative media and from GOP politicians constantly. Not only were they proven right, but they were mostly the ones to do it.
That's not just ironic, it's weird. Sure, you can construct a hindsight story why. Or you can tell me they were evil hypocrites all along. (Yawn.) Their worst enemies and critics predicted The Handmaids Tale and/or a U.S. version of Pinochet, but never the Jerry Springer show.
The Newt-ster was the one who brought norm breaking to the spotlight in the House and that behavior quickly moved to the Senate. Members respond to incentives and cable news--and much later social media--completely changed the incentive structure.
Norms can be good or bad--like everything else. It depends upon what the norms are. Some behaviors from 10 years or longer ago are now abhorrent (and rightfully so).
Norms divide as well as unify. Norms often get in the way of the advancement of civilization and actually have to be destroyed. Many stateless societies are prisoners to their norms (by which I mean that these norms actually oppress significant sections of the population (like women) and keep the population in poverty.
We have willfully destroyed the norms around politics in this country in pursuit of power (and of profit by the media). Part of this is intentional on the part of the people involved--but it happened because FAR too many people took things for granted or simply did not pay attention.
As I said in a post yesterday, far too many of these people are unthoughtful and will destroy civilization because they do not understand how it works, how fragile it is, or how stupid they are being in return for short term gains or (in the case of McCarthy) not much of anything at all.
As someone said in a reply to that post:
No raindrop feels responsible for the flood.
Interesting book:
https://www.amazon.com/Narrow-Corridor-States-Societies-Liberty/dp/0735224382
"No raindrop feels responsible for the flood"! Fabulous quote!
I agree that it is the Stupid Caucus that is destroying the Republic. Unthoughtful. Lacking understanding. But also lacking any interest in learning or doing their job (also true of Trump himself). But it began with the Greed of the Gingrich Faction and was intentional and has continued through to the MAGgot Caucus (now half divorced from Trump) which includes the McCarthy's and McConnells and all GOPers in between imho. It may be fun to watch the MTGs and Boeberts spit at each other and McCarthy go down to a humiliating non-win. But they are two sides of the same filthy coin. That may be what saves the Republic.
As a 70 year old female, I have benefited immensely from the destruction of the norms that governed women’s lives when I was growing up. I now live with a level of freedom I never could have imagined as an 18 year old. So the whole discussion about the value of norms is complicated.
One thing the Trump years taught us, in an unfortunate way, is the surprising fact that many gears in our federal functioning are based on norms, not laws. When there’s a brigade of Republicans who don’t even follow laws (like holding campaign events on the White House grounds), what power does a flimsy norm (like releasing presidential tax records) have?
Excellent point! But a very sad one! When you have to have a law to make people barely civil, you may be in trouble. And I think we do need laws requiring candidates to have some kind of basic knowledge if not values or morals or character or integrity. For starters.
Exactly. Norms are complicated, but I'd be happy if we could enforce existing laws. If we ever get to that point, where we punish lawbreaking, then we can start looking to shore up norms.
Slavery, segregation, stoning adulterers, and burning "witches" were once norms (and still are in some places) if anyone wants some bad examples
Nor snowflake for the avalanche. The more things change, the more they stay the same. Thoughtfulness and thinking are two distinct things, with people engaging in too much of the latter and not nearly enough of the former. I think.
Rodin's statue not necessarily a tribute to the human race.
See...QED...Just shot my mouth off here without giving it a second thought.
I think there were a lot of people who destroyed norms willingly, happily, joyfully, and purposefully. Look at how McConnell got the Supreme Court he wanted, who willingly, happily, joyfully, and purposefully went straight for the right to privacy in this country. And if we don't confront this, say that people like McConnell were not just wrong but should not be allowed to continue to lead this country, well, we'll go on purposefully skipping our way into fascism.
I do think that in any other country on earth, Trump would have been hauled off in handcuffs two years ago (as the sane persons in the WH expected) and McCarthy and the rest of them would have been hauled out by the hair and jailed for helping the insurrectionists. People at the Top should be in jail now! "Only in America, land of the foolish!"
Re right to privacy, it’s in the South Carolina constitution and the SC Supreme Court ruled the 6 weeks law re abortion violated that right - something like that.
1990's you say? How am I supposed to blame Millennials and Gen Z for that?!?
LOL, there's this generation between Baby Boomers and Millennials, but don't tell anyone. We're trying to keep that secret.
Gen-Zers were the indifferent generation: too busy to critique the generations before or after them. They just went with the flow, which wasn't exactly a good thing since it was a continuation of what Boomers had put in place.
There was Generation X. They don't seem to get much press.
Pretty sure that wasn't Ted's point. Millennials and Gen Z weren't old enough to be responsible for the Gingrich era.
"That's a joke son. You missed it. Flew right by ya."
- F. Leghorn.
Ahh say, sometimes sahcasm don't translate well in print, son.
Not even Gen X! Most of us were teenagers in 1990. Even the old GenX were 20s. Way too young to contribute to the decaying of a society.
In conclusion, it is all babyboomers' fault!
Like, no way. That was the establishment that we rebelled against - turned on, tuned in and dropped out to avoid. We became folk singers and feminists, social activists and journalists, rebels with a cause and enthusiastic anti-antidisestablishmentists. But then came the eighties and so many of our fellow anti-war protesters decided to work for Wall Street and it was the age of greed. And we had kids. You can take one baby to a protest but two gets difficult. So blame it all on boomers if it makes you feel good but acknowledge that you kind of like equal pay for work of equal value, the end of the war in VietNam, rights for women and LGBTQ+2Setc, equal marriage rights, the end of segregation, and I could go on. We like to think there was progress on many fronts and now our grandkids are blaming us for offshoring manufacturing when we had no input in that and a lot of other stupid decisions. But don’t worry - we’re dying off and will soon be out of your way. Your welcome.
I don't like blaming generations for this or that, but I think you may be taking a bit too much credit for some of the above.
Rosa Parks refused to move when the oldest Boomer was 9. The Freedom Rides were when the oldest were just getting into high school.
I'll give you Vietnam and Women's rights, but LGBTQ... well, Ellen didn't exactly get open arms in 1997, Don't ask Don't tell was the best compromise that could be reached in the late 90's, and DOMA was also in the late 90's with a boomer President. Greatest was fading then, but boomers were the biggest chunk of the electorate. We can blame the Silent, they won't make a peep.
Again, I don't get into blaming generations and obviously there are wide swings within generations. People act like the hippies all just changed overnight into Reaganites, but that's generally not what happened. The Okies from Muskogee became Reaganites and the hippies just mellowed a bit into more classical liberals.
You’re right that boomers built on a continuum started many years before. You could go back many decades on feminism as well as civil rights and non-cis rights and pacifism and any of the issues and those battles are still being waged today along with a whole lot more. The children of the sixties didn’t invent dissent. Every generation has its time in the sun. My grandchildren will fight different but related battles. But I do get a little peeved at boomer blaming and wanted to rant for a bit. At least we’re not talking about Kevin.
I wish I could ❤️ this 1,000 times.
Does that may you feel better? Sheesh!
I don't like being blamed for societal problems I didn't cause. Sorry my post offends you.
I wasn't responding to your post, Kathe. In fact, I agree with you.
Not this liberal baby boomer. Blame it on Newt et al.
This guy blames MTV: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/01/04/mtv-rock-the-vote-politics-entertainment/
I thought that piece identified a problem but not its origins. Talk radio, cable news, and social media have all made politics "interesting" for profit by generating outrage, targeted with ever-increasing techical efficiency for a segmented audience. Blaming Hollywood, celebrity PSAs, and MTV completely misses the mark.
I read it and if you get rid of the first part I think he actually frames our current situation pretty well. I am in my mid 50s and can remember back when politicians were trying not trying to be celebrities and social media stars. Getting things done for the people you represent was a bigger factor than getting likes. I'm still on the fence about what helped Clinton win, being on Arsenio or the little Perot guy. Getting people to vote is a good thing but they also need to learn that there is more than just pulling the lever and that just because they got "their guy" elected things don't magically get better. I really liked one of the descriptions of Masto of Nevada on The Focus Group podcast. She's a work horse not a show horse. I will take representation from someone who gets results over one that is merely looking for attention. When I looked at it from this point of view I found it to be a little more relative how we got here.
That's why I found it so frustrating. He has some excellent points about talk radio, social media, and cable news, but he really didn't want to blame the flamethrowers, so he blamed the 1990s, the last time he remembered outreach to voters he didn't like.
Oof, I read that piece of crooked intellectual dishonesty. God knows how much the Washington Post and the National Review pay for blatant propaganda like that. I miss reporters.
"All the President's Men" is on one of the channels. Back then reporters actually worked instead of relying social media.