Skip to main content

dear america

hi, it's me. we've spoken about the 2012 election. i still bemoan the loss of "the republicans", my absolute favourite television show. i was able to enjoy it then because i was content in the belief that there was no chance in hell that you were actually going elect one of those clowns, but since i see that the scales have, improbably, started to tip in mitt romney's favour, i feel it's time we had a little talk about you, your leadership choices and the rest of the world.

now i don't mean to pick at one of your historical scabs, but do you remember that previous guy? the one who nobody but you ever liked? i'll admit, we were occasionally a little nasty about the way we let you know our opinions.



but we want you to understand: there were reasons we thought that way. that guy had a tendency to start wars in places he knew nothing about for reasons only he understood. he wasn't much interested in finance and so he figured he'd just let the money guys do what they wanted, which they did. that fucks our shit up, if you'll pardon my french. it raises our gas prices and kills our exports and slows our economy. not yours- or, rather, not just yours, because god knows you got hit bad as well- but ours. and we don't want that. we didn't want it then and we sure as hell aren't ready to go through it again.

and we don't seriously think that you want to go through it again.

you just need to remember how we all got to this point and you need to remember how the last guy just sort of let things unravel to the point where all the houses in your country were worth about $98 collectively. and you have to remember that no one on that guy's team seemed to be too worried that the bottom was about to fall out of the economy while they were spending your national rainy day fund on not tracking down osama bin laden.

yeah, the last four years have been less than stellar. things are far from being back where they were. if you concentrate, you can probably remember that amidst the chaos and jubilation that was election night 2008, the guy you elected mentioned about how long and hard the road ahead would be. or perhaps you remember his rather bleak inaugural address. the point is, he was actually right. not that he's been right about everything or lived up to the promise that we all thought he showed, but he was dead-on about that. the way back for all of us is going to be hard and you know what? we may never get back. or it may take a lot longer than it ever has before, because no one's going to start a world war to give one country's economy a shot in the arm. 

so yeah, we recognise that the current guy isn't necessarily what you imagined, but look at it this way: if you were starving and went to a place where you were offered the choice of a seared salmon filet or eating the contents of the septic tank, would you let your decision be guided by the fact that you didn't much like the smell of fish?

don't eat the septic tank, america. because your bad decisions make the rest of us sick, too.

Comments

Shadowy Lady said…
lol, I love your posts! I'm kinda worried about the elections to be honest. Just the thought of a republican in the office down south and a conservative in the office here totally disagrees with my liberal values. I think if that happens I shall move to the land down under :/
Kate MacDonald said…
It did occur to me that if our southern neighbours want a conservative so much, that we could just switch leaders and be done with it.

Personally, I suspect that the whole American election is a conspiracy on the part of comedians, who miss having a president that made writing jokes easy.

as long as you're here, why not read more?

don't speak

you might think that it sounds dramatic, but linguistic genocide is something that happens. people in power will go to great lengths to eradicate certain languages, not just for the sheer joy of making the world a lesser place, but as a way of beating down the culture that's associated with it. language has a unique reciprocal bond with culture, and every group that has attempted to break down another has recognised that forbidding a cultural group from communicating in their own language is an extremely effective way to tear apart their culture.

there are lots [and lots and lots and lots] of examples of this sort of thing, some successful, some not, but far too many to cover in one blog post. however, i thought it was worth looking at some languages that have been the subjects of active repression, and what the political consequences of that have been.

devastation :: the native north american languages :: it should come as no surprise that the largest genocide in history [by a ma…

long division

after the united states election last year, there were the usual calls for the country to unite behind the new president. that never happens anymore, because, since george w. bush scored a victory in 2004, having launched the country into a war in iraq for no reason, the people on the losing side of a presidential election have been pretty bloody angry about it. democrats hated bush 43. republicans really hated obama. democrats really hate trump.

it didn't help that trump didn't make the typical conciliatory gestures like including a couple of members of the opposite party in his cabinet, or encouraging his party to proceed slowly with contentious legislation. barack obama arguably wasted at least two and as many as six years of his tenure as president trying to play peacemaker before he felt sufficiently safe to just say "screw you guys" and start governing around the ridiculous congress he was forced to deal with. not-giving-a-shit obama was the best president in …

losers?

just a short time ago, i waxed prosaic about trump supporters who felt betrayed by their candidate pursuing in office the exact things that he said he would. short version: i have no sympathy.

today is a bit different. in the wake of america's bombing of a syrian air strip, in response to a chemical weapons attack by the syrian government, my facebook and twitter feeds were peppered with plaintive shades of "we believed you". these are the people who heard trump say that he wanted the united states to step back and focus on defending its own. indeed, trump did say such things, over and over; america cannot be the policeman of the world. even arch-liberal cynics like me had to admit that this was a refreshing argument to hear from someone outside the paul family, and, could easily have been turned into trump's greatest argument against hillary clinton. [he chose to go another way, which also worked.]

trump also said, repeatedly, that america needed to invest heavily …