Sunday, November 09, 2008

Is There Such A Thing As "Freudian Dyslexia"?



As I perused the headlines this morning, one in particular caught my eye. What it said was "Palin Returns To Alaska." What I saw was "Pain Returns To Alaska." [Talk about your "things that make you go hmm . . ."--Ed.] I was particularly struck by the multiple interpretations my misreading indicated. (1) Now Alaskans are going to be stuck listening to her whiny earnestness again, causing them pain. (2) Pain is leaving the lower 48, thank goodness! (3) But Alaska's entire ecology is now more at risk, which is actually painful to all of us who care about such things.

Yes, I think Sarah Palin is a pain. But I'm not upset with her because she doesn't know much. [I am acutely aware of my own shortcomings all along the frontiers of knowledge.--Ed.] I AM upset with her comfort with her ignorance. She seems to be content to wallow in her ignorance--indeed, she even takes pride in it. I guess that's part of her identifying with the "more patriotic" parts of America? In any event, it is a totally undesirable trait in a leader.

I don't know how many times I must iterate this, but here I go again: the world is not going to shoehorn itself into some semblance of what "America" thinks of it. It is what it is. If we deal with our incorrect picture of the world instead of its reality, we're going to get more of the same results that such disastrous policies have brought us for the past 8 years.

I for one do not want anyone in or close to the seat of federal executive power to be someone with whom I'd "like to have a beer." I want someone up there who is smart enough to figure out what's really going on and to do what's best for America in the face of the realities of the world, not some pre-conceived notion of what the world ought to be. [Not that sitting down with the Prez and sharing conversation over a drink would be bad, but it cannot and should not be one's primary criterion for casting one's vote.--Ed.]

New York Times columnist Nicholas D. Kristoff touched on this today in his op-ed piece "Obama and the War on Brains." I wholeheartedly agree with everything he said about the need for intelligence in high places and about how Obama by his mere presence in the Oval Office will do a lot to encourage Americans to think that it's OK to have a brain AND to use it. It's positively Kennedyesque, and it's been too long in coming.

I must quibble with one of his side thoughts, however. He suggests that Obama in the White House may well put an end to the American love affair with ignorance. I beg to differ. "Know-Nothingism" has a long and well-entrenched history in this country. Indeed, our forebears, in coming here in the first place, self-selected for it. Most of them came to get away from the rigid class (intellectual, economic, social) stratifications of the "Old World." Once here, they used the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans as insulators. Not only had they escaped the stultified "Old World," their distance from it meant they were protected from it and could, indeed, ignore it.

When practiced to excess, this sense of insularity becomes "Know Nothingism." It's the downside of the notion that all it takes to be an American is to come to America and agree to American ideals. It's a nice way of saying, "Don't confuse me with the facts. I've made up my mind." It's appalling. But it still thrives in this country. McCain lost his campaign for President by counting on it, but if the local and state-wide Nebraska returns are any indication, it's still a "down-ticket" winner.

Nonetheless, Kristoff is right--real intellectuals are no elite--they are the best example of what being a true American is. But as long as the twin infections of our history of "Know Nothingism" and Nixon's "politics of resentment" infect large parts of this country, nothing will improve. It's impossible to get our educational system to focus on teaching our children HOW to think when all the parents care about is teaching them WHAT to think. It's impossible for us to be the world leader in science and technology when we insist that our schools NOT teach Darwin and DO teach Creationism. It's impossible to get our kids to be willing to learn when all the social pressures from their peers AND their parents tells them "being smart means you are an unpopular geek."

So here's one time I hope I have called it wrong and Kristoff has called it right. Is the mere presence of Barack Obama in the White House enough to help us rid ourselves of the influence of perky-but-empty-headed cheerleaders like Sarah Palin? If it isn't, we're all in deep doo-doo.

No comments: