Note to Candidates: It’s Not Always Morning in America
We could do with a little more gloominess in American politics. History suggests we aren’t likely to get it.
Back in 1979, President Jimmy Carter darkly—but to all intents and purposes accurately—divined a “crisis of confidence” stalking the land. Mr. Carter’s “malaise” speech, as it became known, succeeded only in fueling the sense that he didn’t have the stuff of which great presidents were made.
Mr. Carter was ejected from the Oval Office the following year. The man who defeated him, Ronald Reagan, would in due course be nudged toward re-election by a campaign ad commonly referred to as “Morning in America.”
The television spot captured to a tee the sunny optimism that both Mr. Carter and Mr. Reagan’s 1984 opponent, Walter Mondale, lacked. And it mixed in a large dollop of feel-good patriotism for good measure.
The current crop of presidential contenders have absorbed these lessons well. They know a bullish sense of American pride is required of them, and they express it at every opportunity.
The Republicans are, on balance, more jingoistic and determinedly upbeat than their Democratic rivals. But even the Democrats take care to wrap their complaints about the Bush era in overtly patriotic garb. (An Internet search for the leading candidates’ names and the phrase “greatest country in the world” provides ample evidence of how all-pervasive this boosterism has become.)
That’s all well and good. But in the present moment relentless proclamations of America’s greatness run the risk of concealing more than they illuminate. They numb the capacity for self-criticism. They distort the picture of the world and exaggerate the U.S.’s dominance. And they downplay the nation’s problems and push solutions farther out of sight.
The truth of the matter, unpalatable though it may be, is that the U.S.’s recent track record across a range of areas is mediocre. And it is getting worse.
The bridge collapse in Minnesota last week was first and foremost a tragedy for those directly affected. But—like the Manhattan steam pipe explosion that resulted in one death last month—it was also a graphic demonstration of the creakiness of the nation’s infrastructure.
The American Society of Civil Engineers noted two years ago that more than a quarter of the nation’s bridges were either structurally deficient or functionally obsolete.
A report issued three months ago by the Urban Land Institute and Ernst & Young came to stark conclusions.
“The United States’ relatively low investment in virtually all aspects of mobility-related infrastructure—airports, public transit, railway systems, roads and bridges—is an ‘emerging crisis’ that will compromise the ability of the nation’s cities to compete globally,” a press release heralding the report noted.
The authors themselves added: “America is no longer a world leader when it comes to infrastructure.”
The failure to maintain an adequate infrastructure might almost be forgivable if the federal government were committed to frugality. But its stinginess with the upkeep of roads and bridges is more than matched by profligacy in other areas, from the tax cuts that this administration has lavished on wealthy Americans to the innumerable earmarked expenditures for parochial interests that Congress, even under new Democratic leadership, continues to approve.
That spendthrift behavior is part of the reason why the U.S.’s national debt as a proportion of GDP is worse than about three-quarters of the world’s. Major developed nations (Britain, Spain, Australia) as well as minnows (Namibia, Paraguay, Papua New Guinea) best the U.S. in that category. Next Page >
Your article points out what the most of the left in this country feel about their country that they live in. My view is that if they don't like how affairs are conducted in this country either vote out the bums or leave the country. I have been to the Third World many times in the past. Americans should get a perspective of how the Third World lives. They would get a better feeling how lucky they are.
We Americans are shortsighted. The politicians are shortsighted and are only interested in getting reelected. There are significant problems in this country including infrastructure and retirement among others. But our politicians and most Americans do not care about long-term solutions. They want instant gratification like getting reelected. Until Americans change their perspective regarding the future, there will be no change. All this complaining adds nothing to the solution.
It takes a special turn of mind to categorize the non-controversial statement (by a politician seeking votes) that America is the best country in the world as "jingoistic. . .boosterism." It takes an even more ductile (though not especially utile) intellect to characterize tax cuts as an example of governmental profligacy. By the way, the tax cuts that Stanage says were "lavished on the rich" were across the board, returning money to every tax-paying citizen. For good measure, Niall offers up the classic logical fallacy of the vivid example. (It is statistically likely that in the same week that one Manhattanite was killed by an exploding steam pipe, several times that number of Americans were struck by lightning; yet strangely, few have decryed the obviously insufficient preparations in this great nation for thunderstorms.)
At the very least, Mr. Stanage, your agenda might be better-served if you learn to make whatever point you believe you have without denigrating the most memorable political ad from the largest electoral landslide in the memory of most alive to read your offerings.
It takes a special turn of mind to categorize the non-controversial statement (by a politician seeking votes) that America is the best country in the world as "jingoistic. . .boosterism." It takes an even more ductile (though not especially utile) intellect to characterize tax cuts as an example of governmental profligacy. By the way, the tax cuts that Stanage says were "lavished on the rich" were across the board, returning money to every tax-paying citizen. For good measure, Niall offers up the classic logical fallacy of the vivid example. (It is statistically likely that in the same week that one Manhattanite was killed by an exploding steam pipe, several times that number of Americans were struck by lightning; yet strangely, few have decryed the obviously insufficient preparations in this great nation for thunderstorms.)
At the very least, Mr. Stanage, your agenda might be better-served if you learn to make whatever point you believe you have without denigrating the most memorable political ad from the largest electoral landslide in the memory of most alive to read your offerings.
It takes a special turn of mind to categorize the non-controversial statement (by a politician seeking votes) that America is the best country in the world as "jingoistic. . .boosterism." It takes an even more ductile (though not especially utile) intellect to characterize tax cuts as an example of governmental profligacy. By the way, the tax cuts that Stanage says were "lavished on the rich" were across the board, returning money to every tax-paying citizen. For good measure, Niall offers up the classic logical fallacy of the vivid example. (It is statistically likely that in the same week that one Manhattanite was killed by an exploding steam pipe, several times that number of Americans were struck by lightning; yet strangely, few have decryed the obviously insufficient preparations in this great nation for thunderstorms.)
At the very least, Mr. Stanage, your agenda might be better-served if you learn to make whatever point you believe you have without denigrating the most memorable political ad from the largest electoral landslide in the memory of most alive to read your offerings.
It takes a special turn of mind to categorize the non-controversial statement (by a politician seeking votes) that America is the best country in the world as "jingoistic. . .boosterism." It takes an even more ductile (though not especially utile) intellect to characterize tax cuts as an example of governmental profligacy. By the way, the tax cuts that Stanage says were "lavished on the rich" were across the board, returning money to every tax-paying citizen. For good measure, Niall offers up the classic logical fallacy of the vivid example. (It is statistically likely that in the same week that one Manhattanite was killed by an exploding steam pipe, several times that number of Americans were struck by lightning; yet strangely, few have decryed the obviously insufficient preparations in this great nation for thunderstorms.)
At the very least, Mr. Stanage, your agenda might be better-served if you learn to make whatever point you believe you have without denigrating the most memorable political ad from the largest electoral landslide in the memory of most alive to read your offerings.
Or maybe it points to its extensiveness. How many bridges and steam pipes do we have? How many are collapsing or exploding? Not saying we shouldn't be more diligent and that areas don't need work, but come on. It's a big leap from a couple of prominent examples to the assertation that the country is falling apart.
Really? Who has taken her place?
Statements like this are easy to make, but they're like those cheap hollow chocolate bunnies. A bunch of air on the inside, and though they looked pretty good on the outside, they taste more like wax than anything else. Sure looked pretty in the box, though.
Thank goodness somebody has finally written something like this. Congratulations, sir.
I feel so ashamed to be living in the greatest country on earth. I used to be so proud of our lives and the things we do, like giving the most to charities in the world, all the diseases we cure, or the innovations that make life easier for billions. I was so happy earlier, but now, after reading your well-thought-out article, I feel awful. Thank goodness you came along.
I'm going out now for some ritual self-beating. Followed by a strong course of navel-gazing, mumbling, and general depression. You are right: it is not morning in America. It's like late evening, with a storm and fog and stuff, and we're living downwind from a pig farm. And we're ugly. And we have a rash.
Now I could hold my head low wherever I go, insecure in the knowledge that we are, indeed, wretched and miserable. Thank God we got that straightened out in time.
The Morning in America ad was produced in '84 for Reagan's Re-election campaign. The ad, however misplaced you find the optimism, was a reflection on how Reagan lifted the U.S. out of malaise and stagflation and how Americans were feeling good again. This seemingly minor oversight on Stanage's part actually undercuts his argument that candidates are preaching sunniness in a time of malaise. Reagan's claim was not aspirational in '80 -- it was an accurate look back at where he'd taken us by '84. Onward and upward.
You sir, are suggesting we become like the Europeans. We are not. A bridge falling down is hardly indictive of the country as a whole. It's more an indication that some states don't take care of business.
In this world, America is still the shining city on a hill. Sorry if that makes you sad.
The author should note that negativism is not the only outcome from self-reflection.
As to infrastructure, it's not perfect, but I would recommend that he go and drive in Costa Rica, Bolivia or Venezuela to get a sense of perspective.
Regarding the "More Malaise!" slogan, I have my doubts as to its prospects. It is entirely possible that Mr. Stanage will find like-minded folks, but at the end he will be in a small room with people that equally morose as he is. As much as it may trouble a self-loather like him, America is at its core a nation built on optimism. Only hope can drive people thousands of miles from their lands to come here(yours truly included). One need not be a disciple of Jung or Darwin to figure out how that is part of the national psyche...
The author should note that negativism is not the only outcome from self-reflection.
As to infrastructure, it's not perfect, but I would recommend that he go and drive in Costa Rica, Bolivia or Venezuela to get a sense of perspective.
Regarding the "More Malaise!" slogan, I have my doubts as to its prospects. It is entirely possible that Mr. Stanage will find like-minded folks, but at the end he will be in a small room with people that equally morose as he is. As much as it may trouble a self-loather like him, America is at its core a nation built on optimism. Only hope can drive people thousands of miles from their lands to come here(yours truly included). One need not be a disciple of Jung or Darwin to figure out how that is part of the national psyche...