ALPERN AT LARGE - Although the upcoming November elections will bring a lot of issues to a painful head, the rethinking of our 21st paradigms has never been as intense since…perhaps…the rethinking of our 20th century paradigms a full century ago. What was once “old hat” might now be “avant garde”, and what was once “thinking outside of the box” might now be “tired and outdated”. While some of us might adhere to a way of thinking as the “correct” way, a critical evaluation of what the future holds is not for the faint-of-heart.
For example, those who used to be “on the outside looking in” now discover they’re more “mainstream”—and on the defensive—as their beliefs and way of life appear to be on the cusp of change. We’ve moved from an era where John F. Kennedy’s Catholicism was a major obstacle to overcome in becoming President to an era where both Vice-Presidential Candidates (and a host of the Supreme Court) are Catholics.
American Catholics now confront both the need to keep up with the times and the need to confront the scandals within their Church, while now also defending themselves from those within and without who are perfectly willing to attack the Church (and its devoted believers) altogether.
It’s not hard at all to extend the Kennedy comparison to Mitt Romney, who has endured withering political and verbal assault from both the “old guard” conservative right and the “enlighted” liberal left because of his Mormon beliefs…yet Harry Reid, the Senate Majority Leader, is also Mormon. Mormonism has clearly become more “mainstream”, with both its members and the rest of the country now forced to deal with that religion, as well as its own anti-Mormon bigotry.
Speaking first-hand as a Jew, evidence abounds of the inner angst and agony of the liberal Jewish leanings conflicting with the discovery that being “mainstream” means defending yourself against those (both within and without) who find free license to pull out the long knives and attack both the Jewish religion, the state of Israel, and both the economic and political freedoms that have endeared Jews to America as much as any nation in history.
Jews are used to being Democratic as second nature, enduring past generations of WASP (White Anglo-Saxon Protestant) and other Christian assaults as being “non-white”, “Christ Killers” and self-serving profiteers. Jews were among those who fought for an end to segregation because they could relate to the bigotry faced by black Americans, yet now to their surprise (and perhaps horror) discover that fundamentalism Christians are among their greatest (and, arguably, last) supporters and allies, while rising elements of anti-Jewish bigotry abound throughout many black and Latino Americans.
Jews’ historic Democratic leanings conflict with the concerns raised by anti-Jewish, anti-religious and anti-Israel Democrats who hold considerable power within that political party, as evidenced by the infamous voice vote that surprised Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and other Democratic Party leaders during the recent DNC convention in Charlotte.
Throw in the 1967-borders comment by President Obama and the fact that the President has never once visited Israel, and it’s not hard to wonder why Governor Mitt Romney believes he can break the traditional lock that the Democratic Party has over American Jews.
Traditionally, young people and education-focused voters have rightfully leaned Democratic. Yet now both President Obama and Governor Romney share considerable commonality in their desire to reform schools—and in their fervent belief that schools require reform—as Howard Blume of the Times notes.
The recent teacher strike in Chicago came across as anything but “pro-children”, and former Obama Chief of Staff and current Mayor of Chicago Rahm Emmanuel faced the same conflicts (and probably inner turmoil) that L.A. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa has with respect to UTLA, the LAUSD union that has also come across as anything but focused on parents and children.
On a related but all-too-relevant note, the focus on charter schools, an end to the strong-arm tactics of educational unions, and the need to reform education is both bipartisan in nature as much as is the need to reform Wall Street (a past and current thorn in the side of the GOP). It’s clear that a few “special interests” are hurting public-sector-funding taxpayers as well as private-sector-funding investors alike, and both the Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street were founded on inappropriate relationships between Washington the Wall Street.
And on the foreign policy front, the issue of “Libya-gate” or “Benghazi-gate” (or whatever you want to call it) is one that will not go away for an Obama Administration who has sought to distance itself from other Democratic Administrations perceived as being weak on foreign policy, and more open with the American people.
In particular, the question of whether the State Department was sufficiently prepared for the recent 9/11-anniversary attacks on the American embassies in Libya and Egypt is one that isn’t going away for President Obama and his foreign policy team.
Even more politically threatening is the question of whether the Obama Administration pursued a narrative of a tawdry, inappropriate anti-Islamic video as the cause of the Libya embassy attack in Benghazi when it knew the truth was something far different. With the rightful criticism of past President George W. Bush and his “Mission Accomplished” statement inflaming al-Qaida in mind, the concerns of whether it was diplomatically wise to score political points by highlighting the assassination of Osama bin-Laden also pose a threat to the President’s credibility with ordinary Americans.
Republicans have usually been the ones (not without considerable validity) accused of diplomatic and military stances that alienate others throughout the world…but with the Gitmo prison remaining unclosed and the drone strikes continuing in Pakistan, Yemen and other bastions of anti-Western Islamist strongholds, now Democrats and their political leaders must face the questions of what form a strong, smart foreign policy should entail.
In short, and to conclude, both the Democratic and Republican political parties have serious introspection and soul searching to do as the 20th Century becomes increasingly less relevant. Similarly, Americans of all political stripes have to figure out whether the old and “conservative” (1940’s/1950’s conservatism vs. 1960’s/1970’s liberalism) is outdated and what constitutes the “new” or “cutting edge” in 21st Century America.
And, of course, the need to adhere to the “old, tried and true” or the need to strive for the “new, innovative and open-minded”, and what all that really means, will perplex and confound Americans long after the upcoming November elections.
(Ken Alpern is a former Boardmember of the Mar Vista Community Council (MVCC), previously co-chaired its Planning and Outreach Committees, and currently is Co-Chair of its MVCC Transportation/Infrastructure Committee. He is co-chair of the CD11 Transportation Advisory Committee and chairs the nonprofit Transit Coalition, and can be reached at [email protected]. He also co-chairs the grassroots Friends of the Green Line at www.fogl.us. The views expressed in this article are solely those of Mr. Alpern.)
-cw
CityWatch
Vol 10 Issue 83
Pub: Oct 16, 2012