It is with feelings of deep regret that I observe the political animosity daily growing up between American citizens. Great curiosity has been awakened of late with respect to the rhetoric of hope and change, and the press has dispersed volumes of supporting media throughout the Republic; but they seem intended to diffuse error rather than knowledge; and so successful have they been, that, notwithstanding the constant intercourse between citizens, there is no politics concerning which the great mass of the public have less pure information, or entertain more numerous prejudices.
American politics are the best and the worst in the world. Where no motives of pride or interest intervene, none can equal it for profound and philosophical views of society, or faithful adherence to Liberty and Equality; but when either the interest or reputation of their own politics comes in collision with that of another, they go to the opposite extreme, and forget their usual probity and candor, in the indulgence of splenetic remark, and an illiberal spirit of ridicule.
Hence, their opinions are more honest and accurate, the more closely the politics described. I would place implicit confidence in a Liberal's description of social engineering; of minority policies; of expanding role of government; or of any other Leftist ideals which others might be apt to picture out with the illusions of their fancies. But I would cautiously receive his account of his immediate political opponents, and of those with which he is in habits of most frequent derision. However I might be disposed to trust his probity, I dare not trust his prejudices.
It has also been the peculiar lot of our country to be visited by the worst kind of politicos. While men of philosophical spirit and cultivated minds have been sent from universities to ransack the Constitution, to penetrate Bill of Rights, and to study the manners and customs of conservative American families, with which she can have no permanent intercourse of profit or pleasure; it has been left to the broken-down news media, the schemers, the wandering movie-maker, the not-for-profit agencies, to be her oracles respecting America. From such sources she is content to receive her information respecting a country in a singular state of moral and physical development; a country in which one of the greatest political experiments in the history of the world is now performing; and which presents the most profound and momentous studies to the honest statesman and the philosopher.
That such media should give prejudicial accounts of conservative Americans, is not a matter of surprise. The themes it offers for contemplation, are too vast and elevated for their capacities. The Conservative character is yet in a state of fermentation: it may have its frothiness and sediment, but its ingredients are sound and wholesome; it has already given proofs of powerful and generous qualities; and the whole promises to settle down into something substantially excellent. But the causes which are operating to strengthen and ennoble it, and its daily indications of admirable properties, are all lost upon these purblind observers; who are only affected by the little asperities incident to its present situation. They are capable of judging only of the surface of things; of those matters which come in contact with their private interests and personal gratifications. They miss some of the snug conveniences and petty comforts which belong to an old, highly-finished, and over-populous state of society; where the ranks of useful labor are crowded, and many earn a painful and servile subsistence, by depending on the very caprices of government indulgence. These minor comforts, however, are all-important in the estimation of narrow minds; which either do not perceive, or will not acknowledge, that they are more than counterbalanced among us, by great and generally diffused blessings.
They may, perhaps, have been disappointed in some unreasonable expectation of social equality. They may have pictured America to themselves an El Dorado, where gold and silver abounded, and the citizens were lacking in sagacity, and where they were to become strangely and suddenly rich, in some unforeseen but easy manner. The same weakness of mind that indulges absurd expectations, produces petulance in disappointment. Such persons become embittered against the country on finding that there, as everywhere else, a man must sow before he can reap; must win wealth by industry and talent; and must contend with the common difficulties of nature, and the shrewdness of an intelligent and enterprising people.
Perhaps, through mistaken or ill-directed hospitality, or from the prompt disposition to cheer success, prevalent among conservatives, those media-types may have been treated with unwonted respect in America; and, having been accustomed all their lives to consider themselves the creme of good society, and brought up in a grand feeling of liberal generosity and superiority, they become arrogant, on the common boon of capitalist prosperity; they attribute their success to the simplicity and greed of common citizens; and underrate a capitalist society where there are really no artificial distinctions, and where, by any chance, such individuals as themselves can rise to consequence.
One would suppose, however, that information coming from such sources, on a subject where the truth is so desirable, would be received with caution by the consumers of the press; that the motives of the media, their veracity, their opportunities of inquiry and observation, and their capacities for judging correctly, would be rigorously scrutinized, before their evidence was admitted, in such sweeping extent, against a conservative nation. The very reverse, however, is the case, and it furnishes a striking instance of human inconsistency. Nothing can surpass the vigilance with which Liberal critics will examine the credibility of the Conservative who publishes literature about very foundations of our country. How warily will they compare the details of Constituional history, or the description of the Constitutional father's lives; and how sternly will they censure any inaccuracy in these contributions of curious knowledge, while they will receive, with eagerness and unhesitating faith, the gross misrepresentations of coarse and obscure writers, concerning the character of a Conservative with which their own success is placed in the most important and delicate proximity. Nay, they will even make these apocryphal volumes text-books, on which to enlarge, with a zeal and an ability worthy of a more generous cause.
I shall not, however, dwell on this irksome and hackneyed topic; nor should I have adverted to it, but for the undue interest apparently taken in it by my countrymen, and certain injurious effects which I apprehend it might produce upon the national feeling. We attach too much consequence to these attacks. They cannot do us any essential injury. The tissue of misrepresentations attempted to be woven round us, are like cobwebs woven round the limbs of an infant giant. Our country continually outgrows them. One falsehood after another falls off of itself. We have but to live on, and every day we live a whole volume of refutation.
All the writers of press united, if we could for a moment suppose their great minds stooping to so unworthy a combination, could not conceal the Conservative's rapidly growing importance and matchless abilities. They could not conceal that these are owing, not merely to physical and local, but also to moral causes--to the political liberty, the general diffusion of knowledge, the prevalence of sound, moral, and religious principles, which give force and sustained energy to the character of a people, and which in fact, have been the acknowledged and wonderful supporters of their own national power and glory.
But why are we so exquisitely alive to the aspersions of the mainstream media? Why do we suffer ourselves to be so affected by the contumely they have endeavored to cast upon the Conservative nation? It is not in the opinion of Liberals alone that honor lives, and reputation has its being. The world at large is the arbiter of a nation's fame: with its thousand eyes it witnesses a nation's deeds, and from their collective testimony is national glory or national disgrace established.
For ourselves, therefore, it is comparatively of but little importance whether the mainstream media does us justice or not; it is, perhaps, of far more importance to itself. It is instilling anger and resentment into the bosom of a youthful nation, to grow with its growth, and strengthen with its strength. Every one knows the all-pervading influence of the mainstream media at the present day, and how much the opinions and passions of mankind are under its control. The mere contests of the sword are temporary; their wounds are but in the flesh, and it is the pride of the generous to forgive and forget them; but the slanders of the pen pierce to the heart; they rankle longest in the noblest spirits; they dwell ever present in the mind, and render it morbidly sensitive to the most trifling collision. It is but seldom that any one overt act produces hostilities between two ideals; there exists, most commonly, a previous jealousy and ill-will, a predisposition to take offence. Trace these to their cause, and how often will they be found to originate in the mischievous effusions of mercenary writers, who, secure in their closets, and for ignominious bread, concoct and circulate the venom that is to inflame the generous and the brave.
I am not laying too much stress upon this point; for it applies most emphatically to our particular case. Over no nation does the press hold a more absolute control than over the people of America; for the universal education of the poorest classes makes every individual a reader. There is nothing published in America on the subject of our country, that does not circulate through every part of it. There is not a calumny dropt from a Liberal pen, nor an unworthy sarcasm uttered by a Liberal statesman, that does not go to blight good-will, and add to the mass of latent resentment. Possessing, then, as the Liberals do, the fountain-head whence the literature of the language flows, how completely is it in their power, and how truly is it their duty, to make it the medium of amiable and magnanimous feeling--a stream where the two ideals might meet together and drink in peace and kindness. Should they, however, persist in turning it to waters of bitterness, the time may come when they may repent their folly. The present amicability may be of but little moment to them; but the future destinies of the country do not admit of a doubt; over those of in the press, there lower some shadows of uncertainty. Should, then, a day of gloom arrive--should those reverses overtake them, from which the proudest empires have not been exempt--they may look back with regret at their infatuations, in repulsing from their side a nation they might have grappled to their bosom, and thus destroying their only chance for real friendship beyond the boundaries of their own politcal circles.
There is a general impression in mainstream media, that the conservate people of the United States are inimical to social justice. It is one of the errors which have been diligently propagated by designing writers. There is, doubtless, considerable political hostility, and a general soreness at the prejudices of the mainstream press; but, collectively speaking, the prepossessions of the press are strongly in favor of Liberalism. Indeed, at one time they amounted, in many parts of the Union, to an absurd degree of bigotry. The bare name of honoured publications was a passport to the confidence and hospitality of every family, and too often gave a transient currency to the worthless and the ungrateful. Throughout the country, there was something of enthusiasm connected with the idea of the freedom of the mainstream media. We looked to it with a hallowed feeling of tenderness and veneration, as the land of our forefathers' liberties--the august repository of the rights and liberties of our Constitution--the birthplace and mausoleum of the sages and heroes of our paternal history. After our own country, there was none in whose glory we more delighted--none whose good opinion we were more anxious to possess--none toward which our hearts yearned with such throbbings of warm consanguinity. Even during the wartime, whenever there was the least opportunity for kind feelings to spring forth, it was the delight of the generous spirits of our country to show that, in the midst of upset, they still kept alive the sparks of future friendship.
Is all this to be at an end? Is this golden band of kindred sympathies, so rare in nations, to be broken forever?--Perhaps it is for the best--it may dispel an allusion which might have kept us in mental vassalage; which might have interfered occasionally with our true interests, and prevented the growth of proper national pride. But it is hard to give up the ties! and there are feelings dearer than interest--closer to the heart than pride--that will still make us cast back a look of regret as we wander farther and farther from the each other, and lament the waywardness of the Liberal that would repel the good judgements of a Conservative citizenry.
Short-sighted and injudicious, however, as the conduct of the mainstream press and Liberals may be in this system of aspersion, recrimination on our part would be equally ill-judged. I speak not of a prompt and spirited vindication of our country, or the keenest castigation of her slanderers--but I allude to a disposition to retaliate in kind, to retort sarcasm and inspire prejudice, which seems to be spreading widely among Conservative writers. Let us guard particularly against such a temper; for it would double the evil, instead of redressing the wrong. Nothing is so easy and inviting as the retort of abuse and sarcasm; but it is a paltry and an unprofitable contest. It is the alternative of a morbid mind, fretted into petulance, rather than warmed into indignation. If the Liberals are willing to permit the mean jealousies, or the rancorous animosities of politics, to deprave the integrity of the mainstream press, and poison the fountain of public opinion, let us beware of the example. They may deem it their interest to diffuse error, and engender antipathy, for the purpose of checking their loss of power: we have no purpose of the kind to serve. Neither have we any spirit of jealousy to gratify; for as yet, in all our rivalships with Liberals, we are the rising and the gaining party. There can be no end to answer, therefore, but the gratification of resentment--a mere spirit of retaliation--and even that is impotent. Our retorts are never published in the mainstream press; they fall short, therefore, of their aim; but they foster a querulous and peevish temper among our writers; they sour the sweet flow of our early literature, and sow thorns and brambles among its blossoms. What is still worse, they circulate through our own country, and, as far as they have effect, excite virulent national prejudices. This last is the evil most especially to be deprecated. Governed, as we are, entirely by public opinion, the utmost care should be taken to preserve the purity of the public mind. Knowledge is power, and truth is knowledge; whoever, therefore, knowingly propagates a prejudice, wilfully saps the foundation of his country's strength.
The members of a republic, above all other men, should be candid and dispassionate. They are, individually, portions of the sovereign mind and sovereign will, and should be enabled to come to all questions of national concern with calm and unbiassed judgments. From the peculiar nature of our relations, we must have more frequent questions of a difficult and delicate character, than with any other,--questions that affect the most acute and excitable feelings: and as, in the adjustment of these, our national measures must ultimately be determined by popular sentiment, we cannot be too anxiously attentive to purify it from all latent passion or prepossession.
Opening, too, as we do, an asylum for strangers every portion of the earth, we should receive all legal immigrants with impartiality. It should be our pride to exhibit an example of one nation, at least, destitute of national antipathies, and exercising, not merely the overt acts of hospitality, but those more rare and noble courtesies which spring from liberality of opinion.
What have we to do with national prejudices? They are the inveterate diseases of old countries, contracted in rude and ignorant ages, when men knew but little of each other, and looked beyond their own boundaries with distrust and hostility. We, on the contrary, have sprung into national existence in an enlightened and philosophic age, when the different parts of the habitable world, and the various branches of the human family, have been indefatigably studied and made known to each other; and we forego the advantages of our birth, if we do not shake off the national prejudices, as we would the local superstitions, of the old world.
But above all let us not be influenced by any angry feelings, so far as to shut our eyes to the perception of what is really excellent and amiable in the American character. Let it be the pride of our Conservative writers, therefore, discarding all feelings of irritation, and disdaining to retaliate the illiberality of Liberal authors, to speak of the nation without prejudice, and with determined candor. While they rebuke the indiscriminating bigotry with which some of our countrymen admire and imitate every thing in the mainstream, Liberal press, merely because it is popular, let them frankly point out what is really worthy of approbation. We may thus place the truth before us as a perpetual volume of reference, wherein are recorded sound deductions from ages of experience; and while we avoid the errors and absurdities which may have crept into the page, we may draw thence golden maxims of practical wisdom, wherewith to strengthen and to embellish our national character.
*Note about the above: The original words above were penned by Washington Irving. I've paraphrased and edited to make them more relevant to today's society. He truly wrote about the nasty and deprecating attitude of English authors regarding Americans. But the same evil which gave power to their pens now actuate the splenetic venom of modern Liberal media, which permeates film, newpapers, periodicals, and literature.*
No comments:
Post a Comment