We’ve been bombarded by our fair share of stump speeches these days. I’ve heard so many that I’m starting to get the form down. Most fascinating—and most abrasive to me—is the part where I think we are supposed to imagine music coming up softly in the background while a candidate speaks about the "ordinary Americans” they’ve met along the campaign trail. This is the moment when they share their fireside stories of the unstaged encounters they’ve enjoyed with regular folks all across the nation—like Ben from Minnesota who got divorced and lost his job, but gave the last $5 he had in his pocket to the campaign, or 17-year old Jillian from Delaware who was on the list for a heart transplant and whose parents just lost their health insurance, but who is busy telling all of her friends to vote.
I’m sure these authentic moments momentarily revive the ailing heartbeats of these extra-ordinary individuals whose precious hours are spent stumping and sound-byting and strategizing—and, in stolen moments of quiet, wondering who are their true allies and who is just looking to be on the gravy train. It’s not surprising that us velveteen people could bring some overdue fresh air to their increasingly re-circulated oxygen interactions.
We’re just so real in our little lives, aren’t we?
But I'd be more convinced of any candidate’s sincerity if we were given a few anecdotes about other equally ordinary people who just happened to be a few rungs higher up on the ladder of wealth—like Chuck from the Upper West Side of Manhattan who is so inspired for change that he is donating his recent inheritance to urban youth programs around the country that will help to get out the vote, or Reni the Hollywood mogul who just gave $10 million to rural campaign efforts because Obama inspired her desire for unity. Somehow, these equal opportunity anecdotes would be less patronizing.
But this will never happen—because there is a ruling class, and then there are all the rest of us. Every once in a while, the ruling class just needs us little guys to highlight their moral uprightness as they battle for position and power among themselves. But after things are in place again, we become a lot less interesting—and they act less like “public servants” and more like royalty.
As long as the term “ordinary people” continues to be the euphemism for poor schleps like us who happen to be the voting masses, I know that we are heading for more business as usual. Obama’s candidacy may look to be equalizing our racial caste system, but what about the just-as-real class hierarchy—you know, that one that keeps poor people poor by keeping rich people rich. We’d much rather talk about race, wouldn’t we? That way, we don’t come close to threatening the real power brokers—who actually come in all colors. Their positions remain unthreatened. Ironic, given all this talk of “change we can believe in.”
When us ordinary Americans start to examine class as a preeminent national division, making more of us “fellow citizens” than we otherwise think, then the real revolution is here. Until that time, I’d rather skip the rhetoric. And if they really thought about it, I’ll bet Bob and Jillian would feel the same way.
Laurie
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Our society has grown from one of parity to one of disproportionate wealth. When commenting on the class separation within this country, Laurie brings up a very important point; “ordinary people” are dying. Our society has evolved into a two-class system of haves and have-not’s. These two classes have grow steadily apart from one another as the upper class generates wealth that the larger, lower income class will never see. This two-class system is a result of globalization, the adoption of overseas jobs, immigration, the current crisis in today’s economy, and the inappropriate allocation of our nation’s wealth (the federal budget), just to name a few reasons.
One problem that I have with Laurie’s entry, however, was it does not address how to fix the issue of the current class separation. Yes, it is a valid concern of ours to look back on the decisions of our government in order to question how we achieved our current state of being. However, to complain and not offer a solution to the problem is extremely counterproductive to social change. We as citizens of this country should look to solve this problem and prevent it from happening in the future. Laurie criticized Senator Obama for his comments about meeting “ordinary people”, yet his campaign is the only recent presidential nominee’s campaign to take the stance that Washington is in need of fixing. He believes that our government’s focus and perspective is out of line and that a change in the way we govern is as much or more of a priority than how we govern. Despite how he may resemble a politician who is shadowing the reality of our class dichotomy, he is in my view the only recent candidate who is focused on fixing it.
When it comes to change, perspective is everything. In fact change is, by definition, a new perspective on the same issue. If the same car continues to be brought into the shop because it gets into accidents the driver may be convinced that it’s the car that’s the problem. With a different perspective on this issue, however, one would easily see that it is the driver that is responsible for the accidents and not the car. The way our nation is run needs a new perspective. We have not given adequate attention to our foreign allies, environmental stabilization, renewable energy sources, employment rates, and economic regulation. Our society is where it is right now because of these contributing factors and will continue to decay if we do not change how we view our nation.
All of us can remember a time when people told us they were busy with schoolwork, clubs, jobs, sports teams, etc, when you knew they couldn’t be bothered with helping you. The truth is that if it was important to them to help you, they would find the time. This is how we find out who our true friends are, by watching their actions and seeing, not hearing about, what’s really important to them. Lately, Laurie and myself have felt that our government wasn’t really our friend. It was a casual acquaintance but not an establishment who made us felt like we were the most important asset to this country.
To reverse the social dichotomy that Laurie spoke of we need to formulate a ruling body that is concerned about our interests not only to our face, but also where it matters; in legislation. Politicians can boast about their support for abortion, gay marriage, free healthcare, and higher minimum wages, but without legislation to support it, their comments fall on deaf ears. I believe that Senator Obama gives us the greatest hope for this change in perspective despite how he may not achieve everything he says he hopes to. Change is a gradual process, especially in the political arena. But as with all forms of change once it gains momentum it is very hard to stop. Barrack Obama may very well be the first push of momentum needed to gravitate our society to one full of ordinary people.
I highly agree with what Laurie has posted. I think it’s discouraging for Americans to have to think of themselves as being “ordinary.” The word has never really been some form of complement. If someone were to describe me as, “Oh she’s just rather ordinary,” I would take the description to almost mean boring or mundane, that there is nothing special or extraordinary about me.
In addition, describing the voting masses as “ordinary,” is simultaneously saying that the candidates are the only extraordinary ones. Now yes, I understand that it is not every day that someone becomes president of the United State, and yes, it is not every day that someone even runs for the presidency. But, I find it somewhat disheartening that the candidates need to spend time with “ordinary” people just to see what “ordinary” exactly is. Becoming so far removed from the everyday life of the everyday person is a rather dangerous factor when considering these candidates will be making policies that affect just that: the everyday person.
I also agree with Laurie’s comments about classes of wealth that are also true dividers in our society. Sadly, I think such barriers will be extremely difficult to break. Since the beginning of time there have been the “haves” and the “have nots.” Hopefully, some compromise can be made to help to bridge the divide between those groups.
I highly agree with what Laurie has posted. I think it’s discouraging for Americans to have to think of themselves as being “ordinary.” The word has never really been some form of complement. If someone were to describe me as, “Oh she’s just rather ordinary,” I would take the description to almost mean boring or mundane, that there is nothing special or extraordinary about me.
In addition, describing the voting masses as “ordinary,” is simultaneously saying that the candidates are the only extraordinary ones. Now yes, I understand that it is not every day that someone becomes president of the United State, and yes, it is not every day that someone even runs for the presidency. But, I find it somewhat disheartening that the candidates need to spend time with “ordinary” people just to see what “ordinary” exactly is. Becoming so far removed from the everyday life of the everyday person is a rather dangerous factor when considering these candidates will be making policies that affect just that: the everyday person.
I also agree with Laurie’s comments about classes of wealth that are also true dividers in our society. Sadly, I think such barriers will be extremely difficult to break. Since the beginning of time there have been the “haves” and the “have nots.” Hopefully, some compromise can be made to help to bridge the divide between those groups.
I truly like Laurie’s stand on the views of politics and how there is more division between social classes than there is on race. No matter how many “ordinary people” the politicians see and talk to, it doesn’t prove that they know all of the problems that American families face today or for the past 8 years. They say they came from different backgrounds but no politician is living paycheck to paycheck and haven’t in the at least last 15-20 years of their lives and will never know what it’s like to have decided to not go to work because you can’t afford to get there. Gas prices at one point were so bad in New York that it was cheaper for me to stay home than it was to go to work. I am a registered independent when it comes to politics and this election is the reason why. Obama sounds great and gives the greatest speeches I have ever heard but there is nothing behind them. McCain on the other hand doesn’t know where he is half the time because he is so old and will be the oldest elected president if he wins, plus we all know what republics did for the last 8 years and I don’t think anyone is happy with it. This government is in a mess and we “ordinary people” are really hurting and bad. I don’t see a way out of it. I hope this election changes something but I don’t think someone can just come in and say “POOF” and everything is fixed.
I’d like to say that Ben from Minnesota is an idiot by giving his last $5 away to a politician, it will do nothing for you personally. There is not much any president can do for the average person. Whatever they do will affect us all as a nation.
“Fellow Citizens” my ass! Try being a student just leaving college trying to find a job and realizing that there is no job market because of the economy and working fulltime as a delivery-boy. That’s a Penn State Education being used to its finest.
Really politics will always be one big game of Kiss-Ass and the only winner is the Ass.
I am glad that Laurie brought up the fact that most of the "ordinary" people exemplified in political campaigns are anything but. I feel like politicians are constantly pandering to as many classes as possible by trying to point out how they too are "just like us." This is probably such an effective technique because the lower classes believe that the politicians actually understand their daily lives and it give them a feeling of importance... as if their vote will make or break the election. It also works for the upper classes because of a truly American phenomena in which almost all upper class people (aside from the extremely wealthy such as celebrities) like to identify as the "everyman." Take, for example, the recent addition of Joe the Plumber. He popped in to the spotlight when he asked Obama a question about taxes because he was preparing to buy a new business and since has become the favorite new catch phrase of both Democratic and Republican presidential candidates. Billed as an "ordinary American" the business Joe was about to purchase makes $280,000 in profits a year. That is about 20 times the average ordinary American's yearly salary, so maybe Joe the Plumber isn't so ordinary after all.
Meredith McManus
Post a Comment