Thursday, February 3, 2011
from the lectures
From the documentary and commentary from the professor on tuesday and thursday, we discovered the lengths an individual would go for attention, approval, and power. In George Wallace's case, he went to as great lengths as to completely changing his beliefs and physically getting in the way of two black students trying to attend the University of Alabama in order to get more attention and followers. This concept (especially found in politics)of doing something not because of the good that would come out of it or how morally right it may be but for one's own gain raises the important question of can anybody do anything without expecting anything out of it?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think you raise an interesting question here, and perhaps the most interesting issue surrounding Wallace: to what extent must one compromise beliefs in order to gain popularity. Considering that Wallace was once a moderate, and that moderates tend to garner a small flock of followers, I think he knew that he would never be elected President. So, he resorted to extremes, focusing especially on racial issues (well, he supported racism basically) because that was what appealed to Alabama, where he was from. Like both Aberbach and the documentary noted, his supporters were the working-class South, who were startled by the idea of integration and were not open to the change. Wallace, despite his obvious flaws, was a shrewd man: he knew how to work these people and his oratory skills were great. So, by appealing to the white population Alabama, and eventually other states, he was raising feelings and thoughts that were the cliché elephants in the room. Then, as you have said, we can conclude that Wallace shifted (or covered) his opinions based on what he thought would appeal to his minority.
ReplyDeleteFor politics in a broader sense, I think it is difficult if not impossible to decipher the personal motives of a politician apart from the blatantly obvious desire to win. A candidate must represent his party, so to some extent, most politicians probably defy their personal opinions to better represent their affiliated platforms. However, I am sure that certain political decisions have been made for partially altruistic reasons.
I think in this day and age no one does anything for nothing in the world of politics. How senators vote on measures and have to think about their responses because their opponents years down the line will use just about anything in campaigning. I think the Wallace case of swapping out values is an extreme case of changing strategies in the middle of a political career but is in no way alone in his method of changing what he talks about or campaigns for in order to gain and/or keep power. You have to do what the people want if you want to get elected--into any office. And politicians will modify their campaigns and their platforms to ensure that the people keep "stomping on the floors."
ReplyDeleteIsn't it disturbing then, that what the people wanted could be such an extreme proponent of racism? Of course, the people who supported this were a minority and all, but then why did Wallace go through the trouble of suddenly changing to a set of values completely antithetical to his previous beliefs just for the sake of winning over a minority? The film did say that his true goal was simply to deadlock the election, rather than win outright, but I don't quite understand the point in that.
ReplyDeleteThere are a lot of issues raised by Wallace. To bring up the old topic of E.E. Schattschneider, power is only possible in a Democracy with the majority and Wallace certainly showed how re-framing a fight can cause such shifts in authority. Many candidates will have to make compromises and, in the end, compromise is far better than majority rule. Wallace is an extreme example that represents a heightened dramatic time in US history that seems, nowadays, devoid of logic. Because our district representatives in Congress have to run every two years, they do spend more time campaigning than actually doing their job but I would not go so far to say that EVERY politician does not have the right intentions for their people. Sure, there are corrupt congressman--as there are corrupt lawyers, Doctors, and teacher...these guys just get more publicity and rightfully so because they are in extreme powers of authority. I do not know exactly where my train of thought is taking me, but I just want to say that although Wallace can make us wary of politics, do not lose hope!
ReplyDelete