While reading the handout about F.D.R. and the New Deal for homework, I drew some interesting parallels concerning the average voter in the 1930's to present day voters. As we've been discussing in class, the role of the authority figure is noticeably effected in perilous times. During the election between Hoover and F.D.R. in the Great Depression, Americans were looking for a candidate with fresh hope for the future, and more importantly, solutions: "F.D.R. kept popular attention focused on the need for change, rather than on the tougher and riskier question of what kind of change" (The Great Depression and the New Deal 726). F.D.R.'s popular, though ambiguous, campaign for change appealed to voters then for the same reason as Obama's slogan of "Change we can believe in" attracts present day voters. We crave the instant gratification of a better future, as we should. However an evolving problem in society is the fine line between faith that our choice candidate will deliver in his promises, and the ignorance and lack of understanding of what we are voting for. For example, historian and author Rich Shenkman claims that "Americans are ill-prepared to guide the world's most powerful democracy." Shenkman warrants this claim by saying the majority of citizens are uninformed and getting what little information they have about the candidates from 30 second commercials. Shenkman argues that this is an insufficient basis for deciding how we'll vote for too many are buying into the manipulation of biased media coverage.
During perilous times we may be tempted to choose the fast fix as opposed to a longer term plan. However in these uncertain times it is critical that the American voter takes the responsibility of educating themselves about the different candidate's policies so they can make an informed decision. For if we don't, it's hard to have much confidence in our democracy.
1 comment:
awesome post. I agree it does seem like voters could get lost in the slogan of instant change and put too much faith in the candidate to carry theses promises out. Recently I was talking to a friend about Obama and McCain and my friend was saying that every time Obama speaks she never really knows what he wants to change, and feels he it talking to speculative and unrealistic. Personally I don't think candidate can really plan out everything they are going to do so they have to talk in "bring change" and grand hope phrases because that's the best way to appeal to the pathos of their voters, and most voters in America are blinded by pathos so it works but that doesn't make it necessarily right.
Post a Comment