I am, and lots of people I talk to are. Some predict - as Jon Stewart accurately said - "end times" for the nation.
And to be sure, lots of what I see could easily move me to agree with them. Partisan rancor instead of careful administration. A deep political divide over the boundaries and role of government. International conflicts that skirt the edge of war.
Like Stewart, I see "hard times" not end times. Part of the reason is history; I read tons of it, and I keep getting reminded that what we're going through is nothing special. Kind of like the parent of a teenager, it's comforting to know that what you're going through is typical.
Last week, my airplane book was A Magnificent Catastrophe: The Tumultuous Election of 1800, America's First Presidential Campaign
- one that brought this point home to me so clearly - it was a great book about the presidential election of 1800, which was the first truly partisan election. Thomas Jefferson represented the Republicans, who believed in liberty and in diminishing the control of the central government. John Adams represented the Federalists, who believed that only though the leadership of the 'betters' could the nation be maintained - much less led to greatness.The French and English both were capturing or sinking our ships, impressing our sailors, and looting our international trade. The French Revolution made mob rule a real - not theoretical - risk, and an abortive slave uprising in the South challenged the Republican dominance there.
Machine politics in New York City, and Hamilton and Burr, as awful characters as the worst of our own scheming politicians.
They had problems too, back then, and solved them and moved forward. Events tempered ideology - as they always do - and Jefferson presided over the greatest expansion of federal power to date, as he taxed to build a navy and defend our trade.
Go read this terrific book, go to bed, and wake up to feel better about things.
-
I can't beat Jefferson and Adams as an antidote to Jon Stewart, but let me chip in.
Jon Stewart's claim that "pundits" from a planet called "the 24-hour news cycle" are creating "fear" is just stupid.
A few years ago Stewart went on CNN Crossfire and gave a pompous Ms. Grundy lecture about how that program was "damaging America". According to the story, this actually prompted Eason Jordan to push for cancellation. The 12 people who watched that dangerous program were saved from further damage, and Jon Stewart got wild praise all over the internet for his alleged wisdom.
His carping about how shrill and partisan everybody is likewise double-plus meaningless. Nobody complains about how rough football is unless they're losing the game. If you're going to play football you should concentrate on playing football, instead of pretending that you're too cool to play football.
When Stewart gets a little blow-back for his meddling, he falls back on the Idiot Celebrity with a Big Mouth Defense: "I'm just an entertainer. This is just a comedy program. Why are you taking this so seriously?" This is a variation of the defense used by children who like to kick people in the shins and get away with it, and by high school boys who set people's lockers on fire. What's the big deal?
Let me say that I don't think Stewart is a bad guy. I saw his closing speech at his "Don't Abandon the Titanic" rally. It was mostly gibberish, but I was struck by the guilty note he sounded at the start:
Well, yes it was. It was all about ridiculing the people that cool guys like Stewart have always ridiculed. He has conscience enough to feel guilty about it, but not honesty enough to confess it. It would be small potatoes if it was just harmless fun, but the other thing that Stewart can't admit is that he takes himself very, very seriously.