 |
Monday, July 28, 2003 |
Moral Matters
While I've been prattling on in public about comic books and the like, I've been corresponding with Duffy on a number of issues, which have produced a few good exchanges. Here's one from last week.
Duffy writes:
"History fails to record a single precedent in which nations subject to moral decay have not passed into political and economic decline. There has been either a spiritual awakening to overcome the moral lapse, or a progressive deterioration leading to ultimate national disaster." -- General Douglas MacArthur
What does moral relativism have to say about this?
To which I replied:
McArthur had an undeniable talent for soldiering, but he was never acclaimed as a statesman or philosopher. Nevertheless, I agree with the quote if you equate “morality” to mean personal integrity, commitment to principles and civic responsibility. In my humble opinion, these are ideas worth promoting as core truths and virtues. When they begin to erode, most societies find themselves in trouble.
The problem is, most people who talk about morality are talking about religious fundamentalism, sexual repression, defined gender roles (particularly for women), and categorical taboos on particular types of behavior (drinking, gambling, drugs, etc.) They are ideals pursued by people with little faith in the ability of themselves or others to indulge in moderate behavior. Temperamentally, these are the same kind of people who devote themselves to things like Marxism (a highly puritanical faith, as you know if you’ve ever seen Marxists up close) or Islamic extremism, not to mention other kinds of mainstream fundamentalism, because these ideologies leave little room for ambiguity. Absolutism isn’t necessarily moral. It’s just authoritative in its tastes and preferences.
Genuinely moral people tend not to talk about morality too much. It’s a matter of practice, not theory, and good morals in my book involves minding one’s own business. I would say we could use a little bit more of that kind of morality in this country these days.
4:47:55 PM 
|
|
No More Mr. Nice Guy
OK, interlude over, back to hardcore ranting. Lately I've been reading Ruy Teixeira's blog, The Emerging Democratic Majority (after the book he co-authored with John Judis), which focuses on nuts and bolts ways to get Democrats elected. Today he points to an article in the American Prospect, suggesting that a left-wing Democrat could take care of an annoying problem and demonstrate some toughness and credibility by going after the Greens with both barrels, right now before they let their solopsistic ideological self-indulgence do any further damage to the electoral process. Michael Tomasky makes a convincing case against the Green movement as ill-timed, ill-conceived, unrepresentative of actual progressive ideology or real constitutencies, and objectively reactionary (in that it demonstrably produced the current Bush regime). Consequently, he says, the Dems should not wait for them to urinate in the water cooler next November, but rather take care of the problem now with an aggressive challenge to their purpose and credibility. Regardless of your views on the Greens, the article is worth a look.
9:31:00 AM
|
|
 |
© Copyright 2004 Rob Salkowitz.
Last update: 9/27/2004; 5:33:24 PM.
Emphasis Added Theme designed by Andrew Lueck and Rob Salkowitz. |
|
