Quote:
|
Originally Posted by roachboy
this seems the central problem or dividing line: conservative "history" is more a saint's life of the Powerful, a list of Glorious Deeds of the Great Man than anything even analytic (why did this happen?) not to mention critical (what were they thinking?)
conservatives seem to want amateur history. amateur history that affirms what they already believe. reagan was a great man--a claim by and for amateurs; jimmy carter was the worst president in history: a claim by and for amateurs: people are unfair to george w bush: a claim by and for the dissociative.
===
|
The response to the poll question as to whether it is the primary job of the US press to uncover the secrets of the powerful,
http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthr...81#post2410981
was uncannily along the same lines as it is to the question here. It seems that a defense of the privileges of both wealth and power, go hand in hand. I thought that defenders of wealth did so because they aspired to be wealthy, and did not want their future wealth taxed. The defense of the powerful I do not understand as well. All of it seems to be about a belief in minimal or no accountability.... except of course, for the two million plus prisoners already in US jails.
Corporate polluters, wall street manipulators, republican politicians = "hands off"....from the press and government regulators. Where does a world view like that, come from? It seems the opposite of the American values held so dear.