Thursday, November 09, 2006


i always believed there exist more than one america. one - not necessarily the important one - that vast "piece of land lying between manhattan and california", as bart simpson described it in the tv show and another in what he left out. that cartographic distinction actually reflects the two sides of the u.s. of a.; the global and the local. only a quarter of america's huge economic output is generated on a worldwide scale. a large portion of the country faces inward, rolling the engine of an intraverted economy and a hardly introspective culture of local tints. still wonder why detroit lost to japan? or being fat (no! i won't say obesity!) is a priority social problem?

it was the local america whose balances were challenged by the far more global/international/ transnational dynamics of clinton that elected bush-ism to bolster the inwardly oriented life style and do some house cleaning and setting before globality struck home. however, thumped by 9/11 soon after, the house got only messier. thanks to kerry and the incredible incompetence of the demmies, W remained in charge.

no, america has not unified its two separate facets, that is not why the demmy donkey thumped the elephant now. those troops who die in iraq, they are also overwhelmingly the sons (and daughters, where applies) of the biiiiiiiiig, america with eyes only for itself. this vote is not just an unspoken but loud plea to bring the boys home but also one that demands a new way, a new methodology of relating to the big, bad, hostile world out there. democrat victory depending on a 40 percent participation implies the republicans mostly stayed home.

well i know this is a rather superficial approach to a complicated question but we're doing a blog right? not a science paper. for now, the win puts the democrats ahead in the game of politics, maybe, but not the political game itself. the matter, the concern at the heart of things is not so much winning the war than it is winning the world to a fairly common cause championed by america. anything less is bound to leave the affairs in a mess.

anybody know how far extends the democratic vision ocularis politicus mundus? especially in a world still commanded (commandeered?) by W?

No comments: