The chart and map, below, give us segue into the point of this post.
First, an observation: (looking at the map/chart below) The folks in the nine North Eastern states are among the most progressive, and, least religious in the nation. As it turns out, this equation is true for the remaining five least religious states on the map, as well. For whatever reason(s), there is a correlation of some sort that is true for all 14 states, a correlation between their lack of expressed religiosity and an insistence on a dynamic view of Constitutional values (as opposed to a traditional view).
As regards the 14 progressive states, I think (speaking as an educated Okie) we are not looking at an "anti-religious" common-bound so much as we are looking at a "post modern" social structure. If the commonality of the 14 states was only an anti-religious issue, radical partisanship would not be that which threatens the unity of this country. We could compromise on point, knowing that we were untied in our appreciation of Constitutional values, but that (compromise) is no longer possible. It is no longer possible because "we" do not share in the same historic/religious/existential value system. If you, for an example, are a Communist and want my wealth, I cannot compromise with you. Rather, I must resist your efforts. Because the current state of affairs is not simply a debate over issues, but a contrast of competing perspectives, we have come to a crossroads in the history of this nation. This very year, we will decide much about the soulish nature of the American Experiment.
Bear with me; there is a political point in all this.
This brief is about "post-modernism." You have heard the phrase, no doubt, but [probably] without much definition. As an ex-pastor (before 30 years of carpentry), the reality that is "post-modernism" had a great deal to do with how my religious message (the gospel) was framed. Without going "religious" on you all, the ancient Apostle, Paul, had this to say about his preaching methodology: "I have become all things to all men that by all means, I might save some." It is my favorite biblical passage and it is especially relevant to these modern days. Paul's thinking would equip him, perfectly, to present "the gospel" to a post-modern world. On this blog, religion is not the primary concern, but the continuing history of this nation is. And how we deal with the increasing influence of a post-modern national conscience will have much to do with the outcome of the continuing political debate.
There are two types of people [basically] in this case, the modernist and the post-modernist. The modernist would be an old guy like myself. The "larger narratives" in life are those things that are most important to folks like me. Obviously, "modernist" does not mean "modern" in the typical sense. We (the modernist) were raised immersed in and accepting of the larger narratives. And these "larger narratives" included things like the Bible, the US Constitution, maybe Mozart, scientific research and conclusions, structural theory (civil engineering), anything that commands personal conduct and systems of belief - all things common to our historic way of life.
I believe that, in Russia, "modernism" would include Marxism and Marxist social theory . . . . . . . but not here, in the United States. These are not a part of the "larger narrative" in this country.
By contrast, the alternative narrative(s) is that which typifies "post-modernism" in any society and in this, we have a developing and very serious national problem.
When you find a community that is not typically religious as is the case with the 14 states mentioned above, you necessarily have a community driven by alternative narratives (plural) that go beyond the religious. Where the modernist uses the Bible to determine truth on some level (for example), the post-modernist will use the anecdotal, the personal experience and the testimony of friends and people they trust. George Noory and Coast to Coast is the perfect post-modern [radio] program.
Citizens in these states, do not gravitate toward traditional religion and, for the same reasons, do not get overly excited about Constitutional issues.
Obama has no clue as to "post-modern." He thinks it is about the replacement of one narrative for another. But he is a post-modernist, nonetheless. We know this because he is a social idealist. When asked, "Point to a society that prospers using your social theory," he cannot. But that is not important to him, because a post-modern man will assume that his theory is better than all previous theories.
The critical issue, here is this: those living in post-modern America, the 14 states referenced above, no longer have a personal philosophy that endears them to the Bible, or the Constitution. These narratives mean very little to them and they have little meaning because personal opinion is the more important issue. At the centre of the post-modern experience is the authoritative opinion of the particular person. I mean, they have rejected the Bible, the Constitution, in some cases traditional food science and on and on. What is left? Only their personal opinion.
Evolution and global warming, issues firmly entrenched in post-modern America, are such because they stand as established challenges to the Larger Narratives. This is not to say that evolution and warming issues have no scientific basis, but, at one time, they were not part of the established conversation. They were part of the alternative conversation. Because they are popular opinions, today, changes nothing as to their place in the larger social narrative. Curiously, in time, they will be the mark of "traditional America." They will be the Larger Narratives of that day and time. The new revolutionaries, the post-modern crowd of, say, the 22nd century, just might be those in the Christian underground, or, any who question the Political Establishment of the future. Pelosi and John Kerry and many in the Boomer Generation, once popularized the phrase, "Question authority." Remember those bumper stickers? I do. You could find them on the backside any Volkswagen bus driven by a revolutionary liberal student of the 1960's. Now "they" are the authority, and want to criminalize those who challenge the government. Funny how that works.
Point of post:
if conservatives cannot find causes and issues that appeal to post-modern opinion, conservatism as the larger narrative, is doomed.
If we win the coming election, we will have been given a second chance as a community in love with the concept of the American Experiment. With this second chance, we must learn the lesson that the Patriot Nation cannot survive apart from a conversational inclusion of the nation's alternative narratives. Like Paul, we must become all things to all men. If "we" can reframe post-modern concerns in the context of the Larger Narrative (i.e. the Constitution and its value system), the angst goes away and the country returns to some sense of normalcy, only to deal with the same issues 50 or a 100 years from now.
It is imperative that the values of the larger narrative be discussed and extended in the context of a post-modern conservation. And such is a rather simple matter. For example, stories can be told about the beginnings of this country. Stories of courage and caring are turn-ons for a post-modern audience and there is plenty of that in our heritage. On thing for certain, we cannot reach these people without being a part of their world.
After the election, assuming a triumph for the conservative nation, the matter of party politic and the future of this country in a post-modern world, needs to be addressed, and that will be the case on this blog, if I have time left to join in the new conversation.
No comments:
Post a Comment