I agree that the media should resist the urge to push the standard canards of false equivalency. But I disagree with Mr. Fallow’s byline. And folks ought to stop making this comparison. The Tea Party, whatever one thinks of them, is no way similar to the secessionist movement. Yes, many of them may have delusions of assuming the old Dixiecrat mantle; but their strength and effectiveness is not comparable to that of the 19th century secessionists. By the time the latter movement reached its peak in 1861 there was so much political, economic, and legal force behind it that one could have been forgiven for acknowledging the legitimacy of its claims. Congress had passed the Fugitive Slave Act and the Missouri Compromise, the Supreme Court had issued the Dred Scott decision, and Northern industry had become so dependent on cheap cotton that it was in league with the South to keep the commodity flowing regardless of the region’s demands. The secessionist movement was the result of years of broadening division between two different social realities, two interdependent yet separate economic realms. It was not the same as a two modern day work colleagues disagreeing over the shutdown or the ACA because they get their news from different sources, and then going to their office building’s canteen to have lunch together. If one needs an analogy, the populism of William Jennings Bryant and the demagoguery of Joseph McCarthy are closer in spirit and proportion to Tea Party politics. In any case, we should not obscure the history of the two hundred year system of evil that the secessionist movement supported, nor the untold misery and death that its success precipitated, by comparing it to a handful of misled Obama-haters. theatlantic/politics/archive/2013/09/your-false-equivalence-guide-to-the-days-ahead/280062/
Posted on: Thu, 10 Oct 2013 11:40:45 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015