We all thought we were very smart, but it happened very slowly, and we didn't notice until it was so far underway that there was nothing to do but to participate. Or maybe none of us was very smart and it happened more quickly and thoroughly than anything like it ought to happen. Whichever way, it seemed at first like the full flowering of democracy. We had friends who complained about the length, duration, and expense of campaigns, but after a long interval of apparent apathy, wasn't it commendable--shouldn't we have been congratulating ourselves?--that this process had once again captured the popular imagination? People were excited again. People felt that they were beginning to crack through the barriers and barbed wire (metaphorical, of course!) set up by the gatekeepers to power.
We didn't notice how attenuated it had all become. The preliminary contests began at earlier and earlier dates, and we cavilled about it a little, feeling that it violated some ineffable rule of common sense, but we were made complacent by the daily tick of results and polls. It seemed that every day some state was selecting someone. Then, while we were distracted by who was up and who was down, a few of us began to feel that the contests themselves were multiplying. How many states were there? Didn't that one vote already? We were distracted. It was difficult to be sure. Sometimes a prior contest was tinged or tainted by an obscure violation of an abstruse rule and had to be done over. Sometimes the results of a later contest overturned the decision of a preceding one.
Someone was always in the lead, or someone was always coming from behind, or someone was dropping out, or someone was throwing his hat into the ring. The results of one election determined who would carry momentum into the next election, and we expected that we would go to the polls and confirm the frontrunner, except when we surprised ourselves and someone surged out of the field. Then we confirmed the strength of the comeback, or we confirmed that the comeback was ephemeral. We weren't quite certain when it happened, but somehow we forgot when was the last time anyone won. All the old calendars were recalibrated to the pace and preponderance of campaigns, and the schedules of campaigns were calibrated to other campaigns, and somehow, somewhere along the way we forgot what year it was or what season, what the election was for or why anyone was running. At some point, we thought it had become mandatory to participate in the process. We couldn't be sure, but we felt it was probably safer to show up. Somehow the rate of participation always increased, and somehow the importance of each vote was greater than the last. When was the last time anyone went to work, or ate other than a boxed lunch? We are all pretty sure that someone is still in charge, but we aren't quite sure of what.
Wednesday, March 05, 2008
In the Booth
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
What was the point? Who was in charge? Uhhh....
Amy Goodman's asking about one of the whitest states in the Union going for Obama.
White guilt?
White flight?
All I know is, I feel like Flounder in "Animal House".
To wit, "Oh boy is this FUN!!"
That was really good.
I couldn't agree more; the pandemonium generated by the run-up to the actual vote has so captivated the masses that, except in rare cases of blatant black-balling, the multitude is blinded to the dirty truth:
the selection committee for NCAA basketball tournament is completely biased against the mid-major conferences.
War the Pyramid
re: anonymous
what isn't fun is the insipid racial parsing going on in the media (sadly, our beloved amy goodman seems to have fallen for it as well). white women over 60 overwhealmingly support clinton; white college graduates who own at least two purple t-shirts are guaranteed obama votes; dark people seem to support a dark candidate. WHO GIVES A SHIT? it's all so inane, a running conversation about nothing -- a foolproof way for telecomunications giants to keep the politically engaged tranche of the population from being, um, politically engaged.
i might add that you and your fellow fraternity drunks are doing a wonderful job of spending an entire fucking year without mentioning the wars. must be all that change you're into.
Speaking of mentioning the war, there's this quite recent Clinton quote, according to Andrew Gumbel at the Huffington Post:
>>On Monday night in Austin, she had this to say about what the United States military has done over the past five years:
"We have given them the gift of freedom, the greatest gift you can give someone. Now it is really up to them to determine whether they will take that gift."
There was nothing accidental about this line. She delivered it in response to two Iraq veterans introduced at a town hall meeting at the Austin Convention Center by her friend and campaign surrogate Ted Danson. She liked the line enough that she delivered it again a couple of hours later, at a campaign-closing rally at a basketball arena in south Austin.<<
--hermitlobster
bravo bravo!
one of the best...
;)
the pandemonium generated by the run-up to the actual vote has so captivated the masses
The masses, to their credit, are oblivious to it all and focusing on things that actually matter, like their own lives. It is the elites that waste time paying attention to all this.
Am I the only one wondering if this deliberately written in the style of a 19th Century Russian novelist?
This sounds like it's right out of "They thought they were free", Milton Mayer's book on 1933-45 Germany (or a similar tome). I seem to remember Art Silber quoting the same excerpt.
Just curious.
Echoes in the labyrinth. Like a message left in the mouth of a certain stone lion, a sacred latrine.
the utchat
You're about ten paragraphs away from updating Lovecraft's "Nyarlathotep" for the modern era. Bravo, sir.
Is this from the director's cut of Renata Adler's Speedboat?
Post a Comment