A recent column that appeared in the New York Times suggests that “American idealism” is failing.
The article cited examples from this season’s presidential candidates and a few dismal facts and figures about the general state of our country in support of its claim.
“We are witnessing the dissolution of an idea that was once America,” columnist Charles M. Blow said.
The way it is described in the article, these ideals are crucial to the survival of our society, the “center” around which our culture revolves.
The writer believes that, if our ideals disintegrate, there will be no more façade to provide our country with the necessary drive to maintain its perceived position of power.
I agree things in our country could be a lot better.
I disagree in that I think if this were true, and so-called “American idealism” really were on the decline, it could conceivably be a good thing.
We want to take pride in our country, but sometimes idealism isn’t of practical use.
High ideals can lead to disappointment, and in some extreme cases, despair.
It’s true that having a definitive set of ideals can help people in many cases, and often when people abandon their ideals like this they become rather dispirited.
If we’re wise about it, though, we’ll interpret it instead as an opportunity to form a more realistic view of our country that would allow us to take less emotionally-charged approaches to decisions in the government, such as elections.
We’d recognize no single presidential candidate realistically represents the doom or salvation of our country.
As a result, we’d be able to weigh our options more carefully instead of throwing all of our ideological weight behind a single candidate based on pathos-laden appeals to the ideals we hold valuable.
Instead of becoming disillusioned as a result of our country’s deficits, we would be able to make peace with the fact that they exist and attempt to fix what we can.
We would also retain realistic ideas as to our limited ability to create the “America” represented by lofty ideals.
Not to mention even if we ventured away from these ideals more than one might consider healthy, it would leave us with a clearer mind to contemplate other ideals, ones that don’t receive as much attention from typical American culture.
If “the idea that once was America” does indeed dissolve, we might be better able to assimilate new ideas into it.
This might lead us to a more idealized America.
Since it emerged from this break in idealism, it may allow us to maintain healthy emotional distance from and rationality to public affairs.
The essential point really becomes that the end of our characteristically “American” ideals in no way implies the decline of our society.
It simply reflects a transition into a new, possibly ideologically healthier, time period.
jcworrel@indiana.edu
