As a Dane growing up primarily in Denmark who also holds American citizenship I have always been inundated with comments and opinions on "how/what/who Americans are". When I was a kid I had to tell other kids from my class that what they saw in 90210, Saved by the Bell and all those other television series was not directly transferable to understanding who Americans are, what they stand for or how they live.
I grew up in a liberal, tolerant and understanding family. The values my family and I myself hold dear are equality in opportunities, obligations and rights for all, fairness, care for society's vulnerable and above all tolerance of people with different opinions, faith, nationality. Tolerance does not incur acceptance of wild postulates, it means accepting people's right to hold those opinions. If I disagree, however, with someone holding a different opinion to myself, I will question them and probe their claim. Not in a run to discredit them but to understand their position, and to see how they build their case and why it falls out differently to my understanding of the issue. I will most definitely offer my view on the case and hope to develop both parties' understanding. Dialogue is the way to go. And if a common understanding can't be reached, then let's at least agree to disagree on good terms.
You see, I prefer discussion and searching for an understanding of the truth over a claim deemed to be infallible, the ultimate truth. The truth is, I think, an ever evolving instance of understanding aspects of the issue at hand and linking and analysing them.
You cannot generalise a population of 300 million into a single category. Or into two, or five or ten. I understand the simplification processes that we all use to get a handle on the world, but as an American, I can't accept people calling us racists, haters, or egocentrics, the world's police, etc. And ton another note, I can't accept people wanting to kill Danish people for the execution of acts allowed under Danish law within Danish territory, but that is indeed another story.
I certainly do not agree with the policies that have flowed from the White House through the last 8 years, and I have in fact at times been embarrassed to admit that I am American. But does that not go to show you that there are great differences, levels of acceptance and tolerance within a group of people whom a large amount of the world holds little more than contempt for? My whole family is staunchly Democratic (both Danish and American sides), and I do think that one of my cousins is on the way to becoming a politician (he doesn't know this yet, shh!).
What makes this whole situation even more painful is that people making the most ruthless and hurtful claims are often the least educated, or ones that hold knowledge stemming from a singular base. How will you ever understand the values of a Democrat if you don't listen and take in what's being said? How will the Western world ever understand the areas of different ideologies if they don't engage in a real and tolerant conversation with them? The same goes for the apparent deafness created by hatred some Muslims and Muslim countries hold against America and other Christian nations. (Let me just interject the facts that I am not at all religious, and that I have friends of a variety of faiths, including Muslims).
When I was a kid and my classmates made claims to "understanding" that Americans are all airheads like Donna and Kelly from Beverly Hills 90210, or have dysfunctional family relations like in Married with Children, I tried to inform them that not all Americans are like that.
As an adult I feel the need to make this same claim once more, but in a much more serious situation and to a different audience. Not all people are like the low-educated, lowest common denominator, biased, racist and obviously ignorant qualities being exhibited at Republican voter rallies, volunteer meetings and on Republican blogs and websites.
Not all Americans feel the need to re-ignite a racist and religion-based war on "people who are different to us". So, as a an American, allow me to apologise for the racist insinuations made by the would-be-VP in the horrible case that Mr. McCain should win the current election. And bear with people voting for this pair. Most have a low degree of education, very little understanding of the way the world works and think that only their own happiness and success is important.
Although I am American, I have never before voted in an American election, even though I disagree strongly with Mr. Bush and his advisers and one might say that I should have done so before. But now's the time to send a signal to America and to the World that a tolerant, educated and intelligent man who deals in facts instead of playing on emotions of fear should take his rightful place in the White House. The fact that he is fairly young for a politician in his position, a Democrat, and that he is of mixed race just makes my choice even easier.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
First of all; well said! Dialogue is always the prefered method of settling differences.
Second though, I think you have to take on board the fact that whilst Donna and kelly don't represent American in general, the fact that such a programme as that, and the others you mentioned, are products of American society, and I think that is where the chain hops off. To a lot of people their criticism will centre on the characters as an easy focus, but at heart the problem lies in the fact that these low calory shows exist at all. What sort of a society creates such monumentally inane entertainment, at the cost of shows which might be considered far more intellectually stimulating?
I'm not pointing the finger, after all our little country gladly buys these shows and we watch them too, I'm merely suggesting that American invites criticism by virtue of how it presents itself.
Third, and with regards to democrats. I find most democrats to be fairly easy going people, much like socialist democrats back here in DK, but once you start getting down to brass tacks, I find that the 'left wing' (and hows that for a generalisation) is every bit as prejudist and vindictive as the right wing... if not more so!
There are no militant wing youth organisations marching up and down Nørre Alle every other week, nor do the conservative party's consistently turn a blind eye to the political violence these organisations practice.
In the USA, it breaks down a little different, but there is a strong case to be made for the concept of 'Bush Derangement Syndrome' being rampant amongst the American left, and America has its own variants of the 'Autonome'.
We can debate how far all this extends into the democratic party, but my understanding from the Americas Debate forum is that its pretty far.
Fourth, and with regards to voting for Barack Obama. The democrats are peddling 'change'.
Barack Obama is only human, and his ability to do a good job hinges on the good intentions of the American population. If the American people refuse to stop consuming 40% of the worlds assets, then nothing Barack Obama can say or do is going to change anything.
One has to comprehend the collosal magnitude of America's consumption of resources to appreciate the task of governing a nation of that size. How many litres of petrol are consumed every single day? how many animals eaten? How many rolls of toilet paper depleted? How many batteries are replaced, TV's discarded, computers dumped? how much food wrapping is cast into land fill? America might like to ignore the awful truth about its global foot print, but one thing is for sure, the rest of the world is painfully aware of it!
This is the reality of the democrat position. 'Change' can only happen if it happens on a national level, and if Barack Obama's policies are unpopular, he will simply be replaced.
And this is assuming Barack Obama is a serious politician and not just the latest fad in the ongoing pop culture crusade that gave us those TV shows you were talking about earlier.
Until I see real evidence that America is going to change, then Barack Obama and his 'change' rhetoric will remain a cosmetic political slogan.
Sould Obama be elected (which I think is a distinct possibility) than Barack Obama will meet reality and 'get bitten' just as all other politicians do. From day one, his rhetoric of change will be forced to give way to political and economic reality.
Once, a few years ago we had a debate in Denmark regarding the budget (you might recall this, it was in 2003/4). The debate became intense and much mud was being slung about when I chanced to see an interview with one of our chief economists.
When asked which political pespective he thought gave the better path in the turbulent global environment, this economist smiled and said, 'as to that, he was apolitical'. The journalist asked him why, and he replied, 'because the politicians don't control the economy. The economy controls the politicians.' When asked to elaborate he explained that the politicians cannot simply change the way money is allocated. Most governments are lucky if they retain control of 10% of their nation's liquid assets, and most budgets deal with only two or three percent of the allocated wealth of the nation.
A politician who promises change therefore can only ever change a few details. Perhaps with a country as big and bombastic as the USA, these few details will actually make a difference, but in that case, I believe it is Barack Obama's skin colour which is gong to make the biggest change, and not his policies.
Congratulations on voting though. Even a cosmetic difference might be a big improvement these days!
Gosh, where to start.. your comment is longer than my original post :.)
I do certainly agree with the fact that tv shows and opinions voiced in newspapers, blogs etc. are a symptom of (at least) a part of the society that it portrays. However, I disagree with your "What sort of a society creates such monumentally inane entertainment?". All societies do - it's called entertainment. And yes, of course taking time to watch silly entertainment instead of more informed and informing shows is not great, but it is what most people do, at least part of their spare time. One might hope that more people would spend more time on substantial movies/programs/publications etc..
What I have a problem with is that people take this obviously distorted and simplified perspective of America as "the truth", neglecting other sources of information. (And by the way, what would people think of Denmark if all they ever saw was KLOVN or Hvide Løgne?)
I do know you're skeptical towards what Social Democrats in Denmark are actually achieving, and to be honest so am I. With regards to the US Democrats being related to the more extreme (in the true meaning of the word, mind you) "left wingers" as you say, I honestly don't know enough to debate this. I'm sure there are ties though, and I will gladly admit that although ignorant to exactly what they stand for, I prefer ties to this extreme of the political specter than to the extreme right.
Fourth - Barack for Change. I don't assume he will waltz in and change everything overnight, but I certainly do hope that he can change the flow of government spending to support the causes that we as Danes greatly benefit from, such as healthcare, education, social welfare. I do think that having him in control will lead to a more just America than what might be experienced under McCain.
Also, I totally agree with the suggestion that the greatest change he might bring into the White House and onto the world scene is through his skin colour, how simple and symbolically-loaded a detail this might be. It shows the world that not all Americans are scared of people who are not white, middle class Christians.
I think he, and perhaps more importantly the people who elect him, can change things in America. Change away from a selfish, me-me-me society of "The American Dream" (which people like if they aren't poor, un-insured and un-educated, or if they have been convinced by Republican advocates that less taxes and government regulation is so much better for them because they get 50$ more a month instead of free healthcare) is in my view a good thing. I don't at all oppose the "you can be anything that you want American Dream", but I don't really categorize those two together.
I guess one has to realize that the different ideologies exist side by side, and that there is truth in all of them. Personally I lean (strongly!) to more socially minded ideologies, and less of a me-me-me-based criteria of success for society. But having both presented as massively as they are being these days exacerbates the differences and has created a rhetoric that I find fairly unpleasant. Which is why I finally decided to vote and which is why I wrote this piece.
Well, a long thoughtful post deserves attention I find.
=)
I disagree with your "What sort of a society creates such monumentally inane entertainment?". All societies do - it's called entertainment.
Are you saying all entertainment is inane?
I suspect you mean value is dictated by perspective? If so, then thats true, but if your lamenting the state of American society under one particular ideological perspective, then you have to identify the effects of that ideology.
The 'me, me, me' culture is reflected in the shows you chose to high light so in fact, your making the same basic assumption I am. You just don't like to generalize and point the finger at Americans the people as opposed to America the nation. But thats what a nation is; a collective endeavour. The sum of many parts. 'We the people' and all that.
America has its ill reputation because it makes such rubbish as these shows. Yes, we also have our monstrosities, but the difference is, our inane rubbish isn't exported to the rest of the planet to expose our shortcomings.
America is happy to display its brazen bigotry, religious fundamentalism and gleeful ignorance for all the world to see.
~~~~~~~~
I do know you're skeptical towards what Social Democrats in Denmark are actually achieving, and to be honest so am I. With regards to the US Democrats being related to the more extreme (in the true meaning of the word, mind you) "left wingers" as you say, I honestly don't know enough to debate this. I'm sure there are ties though, and I will gladly admit that although ignorant to exactly what they stand for, I prefer ties to this extreme of the political specter than to the extreme right.
There is a clear difference I find between the two sides. Certainly here in Denmark. There is no National Socialist Party in the Folketing and no conservative or nationalist ideological groups using physical violence as a political tool.
Take a moment to consider your repsonse. You'd prefer the reality of left wing extremism to the (unlikely) possibility of right wing extremism.
For my part, I see no difference between the two. Having your head kicked in by a storm trooper isn't any the less pleasant because he happens to be closer to your own political perspective. I find it intolerable that people in uniforms turn our streets into battle zones, but far worse is that the autonome are supported by democratically elected politicians. It makes a mockery of everything this country claims to stand for when some parties have their own militia.
~~~~~~~~
I guess one has to realize that the different ideologies exist side by side, and that there is truth in all of them. Personally I lean (strongly!) to more socially minded ideologies, and less of a me-me-me-based criteria of success for society. But having both presented as massively as they are being these days exacerbates the differences and has created a rhetoric that I find fairly unpleasant. Which is why I finally decided to vote and which is why I wrote this piece.
I used to be socially minded, but events in recent years have persuaded me otherwise.
I'm not sure who I'd vote for if I were an American. Neither of the two main candidates I think. McCain is simply too old to be realistic and this doesn't bear thinking about.
I don't think any of the candidates offer much in the way of sound political policies. Barr is too much like Bent Bentsen (ugh!), Baldwin even more so.
I'd probably go for McKinney if I could be sure she wasn't a crypto socialist as so many Greens are.
Well, a long thoughtful post deserves attention I find.
Thanks for that, and thanks for your equally thoughtful comments :.)
Are you saying all entertainment is inane?
No, but I do think there will be an element of inanity (is that a word?) in the production of entertainment in all countries and societies. I do believe value is dictated by perspective, as one might actually think (in fact I know) that many young people used the moral dilemmas of 90210 for mirroring their own life and making choices, scary as it seems. I guess my point is that I think you can’t dismiss the value of something simply because you don’t agree with the package. Relating back to my original point about this: whether the shows are useful or educational or not does not in my book make it fair to judge a nation by some random productions. What I was trying to emphasise is that although they may portray a proportion of the population they do not account for all, and that generalising about a nationality will invariably omit other elements of the citizens (a nation = the sum of many parts). And, in the case of Americans, there are highly educated, tolerant, non-racist, etc., etc. people.
Yes, we also have our monstrosities, but the difference is, our inane rubbish isn't exported to the rest of the planet to expose our shortcomings.
True. But it doesn’t make the judging of the country based on ridiculous publications less silly.
You’re right, I don’t like to point fingers. It’s a strength and a weakness in me, not wanting to identify too ruthlessly the “guilty”. I do think it relates to my general conviction that “I know not enough to judge” people. And yet I do, of course…
I do know you're skeptical towards what Social Democrats in Denmark are actually achieving, and to be honest so am I. With regards to the US Democrats being related to the more extreme (in the true meaning of the word, mind you) "left wingers" as you say, I honestly don't know enough to debate this. I'm sure there are ties though, and I will gladly admit that although ignorant to exactly what they stand for, I prefer ties to this extreme of the political spectre than to the extreme right.
There is no National Socialist Party in the Folketing and no conservative or nationalist ideological groups using physical violence as a political tool.
Dansk Folkeparti?!
Take a moment to consider your repsonse. You'd prefer the reality of left wing extremism to the (unlikely) possibility of right wing extremism. For my part, I see no difference between the two. Having your head kicked in by a storm trooper isn't any the less pleasant because he happens to be closer to your own political perspective. I find it intolerable that people in uniforms turn our streets into battle zones, but far worse is that the autonome are supported by democratically elected politicians.
A: Does extremism necessarily involve storm troopers, battle zones and uniforms? Not in my book, but then perhaps that’s because I was thinking about the ideologies and the influnces they have on public debate etc.
B: Yes I would prefer “my street is a warzone” due to something that is closer to what I believe in, rather than say, the power demonstrations that have taken place in Copenhagen lately between Hell’s Angels and the “indvandrerbander”. This doesn’t stand up in court, but nevertheless, I prefer our prime minister being splashed with red paint to overt racist comments being made by fools (including elected politicians).
I used to be socially minded, but events in recent years have persuaded me otherwise.
I have noticed that in some of your previous posts. And although I see your points, I do not necessarily always agree. Which is good for discussions :.)
I don’t know the politicians you mention – my interest in American politics has honestly until recently been sporadic and fairly focused on foreign, environmental, and other policies that influence the world, and presidential elections. I think I might care a bit more about national policy and governance, now that I've started poking around..
..sorry for the lack of formatting, hope you can make sense of it anyway...
Btw I'm off to Brussels until Monday, so will probably not be online much till then.. Have a nice weekend!
Post a Comment