December 11, 2003

The Obsession with the Lack of Moral Compasses

Andrew Sullivan wrote a great piece on moral scolds some years back and articulates exactly my problem with the "Nobody has any moral compass these days" brand of conservatives. (Oh, Jesus, here we go again.)

To all of you out there who are already beginning to write me emails at this very moment, let me just say: I realize not all conservatives are moral scolds. I accept that. But I think it important to talk about the other "brand", the puritan brand. And so that's what I'm gonna do. Or - let me start with Andrew Sullivan's words:

This moral obsessiveness was the creation of Kenneth Starr and something far larger than Kenneth Starr. It was the creation of a conservatism become puritanism, a conservatism that has long lost sight of the principles of privacy and restraint, modesty and constitutionalism, which used to be its hallmarks.

The scolding, moralizing conservatism I'm talking about here is one with a lineage; it is the construction of a cadre of influential intellectuals who bear as much responsibility as anybody for the constitutional and cultural damage this moment may have already wrought. And they will bear an even greater responsibility if the ultimate victim of this spectacle is the reputation and future of conservatism itself.

I read William Bennett's book The Death of Outrage (sorry Dad) when it first came out. I bought it because I was so embarrassed by Clinton at that time, I was so embarrassed by the squirming human I perceived beneath the Presidency, and it was horrifying ...

If the man bit his lip in "regret" one more time, I thought my head might spontaneously combust.

So I thought Bennett's book might provide some "you are not alone" solace. Instead, I was treated to a diatribe about how our society has no more values anymore, how everything is going to hell, how nobody cares about the right things anymore. Bill, when you say "the death of outrage", you just mean that you don't feel that people are outraged by the things that outrage you anymore. And this BAFFLES you. But let me tell you: PLENTY of people still are outraged about stuff ... but you disagree with what outrages them, and so they all must be idiots, and you are a wise sage on the mountaintop.

Clinton wagged his finger at us because he was just trying to save his ass (I still cringe at the image)...but Bill Bennett wags his finger to admonish us. He wants to REFORM me. Reform all of us. It's obnoxious.

I'm just one woman, but I know that the people I know, my friends, my family, all care about living a good life. A life of integrity. They want their kids to grow up to be productive, happy. Some of us even go to church regularly! So ... who the hell is Bennett talking about with such a blanket generalization?

I've never been a prissy girl. Or a prude. I have a free and independent lifestyle, I'm single, I have friends from all different walks of life. I'm an artist. I see no difference between gay and straight. Or: I can see the difference, obviously, but it doesn't mean anything to me. You're gay, I'm straight, let's go have some Guinness and talk about politics, movies, and Thomas Mann, shall we?

It's the "content of the character" that matters to me. (Hm. Sounds familiar)

So Bill Bennett is way too sanctimonious for me, he thinks he's right about stuff, he makes way too many assumptions about the right way, the moral way, the right values to have, blah blah.

I do believe that there is such a thing as morality, I do believe in a morality that is not subjective and not relative. There is such a thing as Good, and there is such a thing as Bad.

But yearning after the legendary good old days when children respected their parents and families ate dinner together and people went to church and had the "right" values seems foolhardy, ahistorical, and downright simple-minded. People in the 1940s had tormented family lives. You just never heard about it! Parents beat their kids. Girls got pregnant in high school. But nobody talked about it. There was a muzzle over the mess of life. Staring at the past thru rosy "those were the days" goggles seems like a waste of time.

Read Catcher in the Rye. Hell, let's go further back. Read Tess of the D'Urbervilles. Read Wuthering Heights. Read Anna Karenina. Read Oliver Twist. Read The Bible, for God's sake! People behave HEINOUSLY in the Bible, on occasion. There is no utopian past. It does not exist.

A quote comes to mind, can't remember where it came from: "She had a nostalgia for a life she had never led."

The "What has happened to the youth of today" crowd are unwilling to admit that they just don't GET why everybody listens to Eminem and Britney Spears, that they themselves are no longer cool, that they will never be cool again, and because they don't GET it, then they must criticize it, because they do not understand it.

There's no big mystery why "kids today" love Eminem and Britney Spears. Because they f***ing rock, okay? Kids like loud music that makes them want to dance. DUH. That's why they love stars who do that.

There are a couple of Britney Spears songs which, if you have any musical sense at all, will FORCE you to tap your feet, and if you're feeling really free, perhaps dance around the living room. I'm not admitting to doing this myself, EVER, I'm just saying that it's true. Theoretically.

We, as adults, can be all cynical and above it all, but to a 15 or 16 year old girl, Britney Spears seems very cool.

And Eminem: fuggedaboutit!!

If you hear his "Till I Collapse", and you still can't get why teenagers listen to him, and lose their minds, and cry when they go to his concerts, then you have never ever been young. Or, if you have been young, then you have completely forgotten what it is like to be a lonely teenager, with an aching heart, trying to find your way in the world. Because THAT is who Eminem is talking to.

So I get very impatient with people who scold me. Who take it upon themselves to scold the entire world. Whose reason for living is to scream at other people, "This world is going to hell in a handbasket!"

Dude, if you'd just stop screaming about that handbasket, then maybe your schedule would clear up a little bit, so that you could actually have some FUN. Why do you care so much about how other people live their lives?

I basically care if people murder people, if people run a crackhouse on my block, I care if people break the law, I care if children are abandoned or abused. But I do not care what music they listen to. I do not care who they have sex with. I do not care if they are married or unmarried. I do not think that it's my business to teach the rest of the world the proper way to live. Plenty of people probably disapprove of MY lifestyle, but I can't obsess about them, worry about them. They don't know me.

So who knows what is to become of Bennett, now that it appears he's just another moral-scold who is also a raging hypocrite. There's something fascinating, on a psychological level, about it all. I guess I would like to know what was going on in his head, all this time. Out of pure curiosity.


Also - as a coda:

Little red flags go up in my mind when I hear people say stuff about "these days", or "what'sa mattah with kids today" or "whatever happened to concepts like honor or family"?

Enforced nostalgia. Willful romanticization of the past.

No thanks. I'm not interested.

Posted by sheila
Comments

Sheila, Sheila--In your "Rambling Discourse..." post you said you were many things you were not proud of. To that list you should add that you thing Brittney Spears f***ing rocks. Brittney Spears??? Lord Almighty!!

Posted by: David at December 11, 2003 3:45 PM

I was so distracted that I wrote "thing" instead of "think." Maybe because it was a thing I couldn't think about.

Posted by: David at December 11, 2003 3:47 PM

To quote my friend David Wagner:

"I'm not above it. I'm not PROUD of it, mind you, but I'm not above it."

Posted by: red at December 11, 2003 3:51 PM

Sheila, all I can say is, I have defended both Donny Osmond AND JLo on your blog. So, I'm not above it, either,apparently.HA HAAHAH!

Posted by: Beth at December 11, 2003 4:08 PM

You saying "Britney Spears rocks" is funnier than the waitress calling me "ma'am". You should add her new album to your wishlist.

Posted by: Bill McCabe at December 11, 2003 4:12 PM

HAHAHAHA

Posted by: red at December 11, 2003 4:14 PM

I do not own any Britney Spears. Honest!

Posted by: red at December 11, 2003 4:17 PM

So you're sure you don't want "In The Zone" for Christmas?

Posted by: Bill McCabe at December 11, 2003 4:20 PM

Bill -

don't you dare! Ma'am, I'm begging you!

Posted by: red at December 11, 2003 4:24 PM

It would have been the perfect gag gift, right up until the moment you embedded it in my skull.

Posted by: Bill McCabe at December 11, 2003 4:29 PM

let's just file Britney under a semi guilty pleasure. we've all got them. even Bill Bennett (ka-ching ka-ching at the video slot machines). I found myself tapping my foot to "Hit me baby one more time" and it was all downhill from there.

Posted by: red at December 11, 2003 4:31 PM

Yes, I've heard it said that the song has a somewhat addictive beat. Most of my guilty pleasures involve bad movies instead of bad music.

Posted by: Bill McCabe at December 11, 2003 4:36 PM

The lines aren't between Democrat and Republican or Conservative and Liberal (if conservative and liberal still have any real meaning anymore) but are of a economic nature when those resources are devoted to power. Our politicians are, for the most part, bought and sold by their dependence upon an expensive political process paid for and controlled by the ultra wealthy.

There are lines drawn in the dirt at our feet by those who admire truth and compassion above all else with no regard to their pocket's status.

We have been warned for years that business would corrupt our government, turning it into a tool of the corporations.

“The few who understand the system, will either be so interested in its profits, or so dependent on its favors that there will be no opposition from that class, while on the other hand, the great body of people, mentally incapable of comprehending the tremendous advantages...will bear its burden without complaint, and perhaps without suspecting that the system is inimical to their best interests.”

— Rothschild Brothers of London
communiqué to associates in New York
June 25, 1863

“I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country.”

— Thomas Jefferson
1812

“A great industrial Nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the Nation and all our activities are in the hands of a few men.

“We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the world — no longer a Government of free opinion, no longer a Government by conviction and vote of the majority, but a Government by the opinion and duress of small groups of dominant men.”

— Woodrow Wilson
U.S. President during capitalist World War I

BTW - I heard the Brittney Spears and Michael Moore were collaborating on a new project.

Posted by: Jim Moran at December 11, 2003 11:09 PM

Sure in the 40s and 50s parents beat their kids. For no reason.

How do I know - I was one of the beaten.

I reconciled all this with my father before he died a few years back but let me tell you about his funeral.

A number of his friends came to me and told me how sorry they were that they didn't know what to do at the time.

We have come a long way. For the better.

Billy B. and his kind are stupid. They use their moral stance to avoid getting their hands dirty and solving real problems.

At least my father's friends acknowledeged error. Bless them.

Posted by: M. Simon at December 14, 2003 5:21 AM

Jim,

Your post has much to commend it except for one minor point. Compared to all other systems the people in corpratist/capitalist dominated countries are doing better than citizens (or is it slaves) of other systems.

Of course if you are being sarcastic - never mind.

Posted by: M. Simon at December 14, 2003 5:25 AM

The crack house on your block is government subsidised (aka the War On Drugs).

If you don't want one on your block you know what to do - end the government subsidy.

Posted by: M. Simon at December 14, 2003 5:29 AM

Sheila--when I heard about Todd Beamer and Flight 93, I was thinking of those scolds who said we were degenerate, that we wouldn't know the right thing to do, nor would we do it, that we were morally weak. And I thought of what those passengers did, I heard about those people lining up to give blood, and I just said something like "F*** you Buchanan!" and ignored those scolds ever after.

Posted by: JC at December 14, 2003 12:31 PM

JC:

Fabulous point. I felt exactly the same way.

Posted by: red at December 14, 2003 3:09 PM

M. Simon:

Thanks so much for your comment. There's a "tough love" aspect to conservatism that I really like - but when it comes to dealing with family chaos, domestic abuse, drug addiction - yeah, you need some tough love - but you also need straight out compassion. Compassion for people who make mistakes, and compassion for the powerless. Your comment is a very necessary reminder of that.

Posted by: red at December 14, 2003 3:11 PM

Red, et al:


Mistakes are like accidents - authentic ones are rare; and self serving choices that result in harm to ones self or to others are too often rationalized as mistakes, instead of being rcognized as a reflection of self-centeredness, greed and arrogance.

Posted by: Marcel at December 15, 2003 3:59 AM

Marcel -

Regardless. I don't want to go back in time to when mistakes or accidents are not talked about and where any girl who gets pregnant in high school is suddenly Hester Prynne.

No thanks.

Posted by: red at December 15, 2003 9:24 AM