Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Rick Ferrante's avatar

Yes, this resonates. I think there is also part of this that involves not only the rate of change along any particular axis, but also the breadth of changes and the number of factors that need to be considered. This seems implicit in what you’re saying but has a different dynamic/emotional valence.

It’s one thing to take into consideration differential change between groups one is accustomed to addressing but to add new stakeholders who have novel values and methods of determining validity is admitting that one’s previous beliefs suffered from category errors, e.g., 1619 project or accommodating indigenous concerns around burial grounds.

The transition not only makes the solutions more complex and potentially intractable, but also often undermines the aspects of oneself that one deemed most valuable. (I'll take the cheap shot at manliness here, since it permeates so much of the US political outlook)

Expand full comment
Angela Stalcup's avatar

"Or, we can recognize that nostalgia is fed from exactly the dynamic that got us to this thorny moment in the first place: the denial of our broken social contract, and institutions and rituals that were performatively there, the way the debate was, but no longer providing the function that was the stated reason for their existence in the first place. "

I so appreciated your analysis. I decided not to watch any of the debates this election cycle because they felt like a theatrical spectacle more than a opportunity to learn about the candidates. But with each debate, I felt like I had missed doing my civics homework and that I wasn't playing my part in the process. I still feel the pull of the ritual, even though I believe that they do more harm than good. Thanks for the call to action to "call out the ridiculousness" and to let go of these useless and dangerous rituals.

Expand full comment
50 more comments...

No posts