The Hunt for Blue October
29th July 2012
Mark Helprin has some fun with a Voice of the Crust.
Every day it seems, reason and the English language are ravished by contemporary American politics.
For example, as there is no God-given tax rate, when the rate increases it is an increase, not the expiration of a decrease. Were it the latter, one could say that the Bush tax cuts were not tax cuts but the expiration of the Clinton increases, the Clinton increases the expiration of the Reagan cuts, the Reagan cuts the expiration of previous increases, and so on. Such is the thinking of non-effervescent minds that see as a cut a lesser increase in spending than they advocate, or urge passage of a stupendous, juggernaut, congressional bill so that they can find out what’s in it.
‘Progressives’, like their siblings the Socialists and Communists, realize that controlling the meaning of language perforce controls the means of debate. Hence the use of loaded terms like ‘piracy’ and ‘theft’ for copyright infringement, and ‘gay marriage’ for a relationship that has never been characterized as marriage in all of human history.
The nation appears more and more able to eat whatever words are shoved down its throat. It is told, and does not protest, that Islam is a religion of peace. Islam is indeed a religion of peace, but it is also, quite demonstratively and throughout the world in proof after proof day after day, a religion of war.
(And that’s not to mention usage of ‘racism’ for being disagreeable to Muslims, which aren’t a race even by the expansive standards of the Left.)
Perhaps the most brazen language diktat has been the mischievous switch of political colors. Stalin would hardly believe it, but blue now supposedly signifies the left and red the right. According to Wikipedia and the Washington Post, so it must be true, the change came in 2000 courtesy of MSNBC and NBC’s “Today” show. It next migrated to David Letterman at CBS, and then went bacterial. The spirit of the change is reminiscent of the cable TV directory that read, “The World’s Best Ho . . .” when space was clearly available for “tels.” One can imagine the high-pitched giggling at this naughtiness. Saddling your political rivals with a symbol to which they have been historically opposed is an even better and naughtier joke. Either it was that or numbing cluelessness.
That’s always puzzled me. Republicans are Red? Not even. Democrats are Blue, the traditional color in Europe for Reaction? Guess their admiration for Europe stops at that water’s edge.
Red is the mobile color of passion and engagement, and blue the staid color of reason and detachment. As you may recall, the left champions radical change spurred by boundless compassion, while the right wants to check the passions of human nature as they flow into politics, and to balance opposing powers in a stable equilibrium. Over time, natural affinities for the two colors have been confirmed by adoption—communist, socialist, and labor parties almost always favoring red. But if NBC says to, we had better jump into line. Most of the country has already done so without a thought. Who says “old media” is vestigial? They are highly adaptable, or, as they might say, “Better blue than dead.”
After all, if the Voices of the Crust say it, is it not our duty to believe it?