[Vision2020] The crazy side of the line

Tue Nov 29 09:47:53 PST 2005

" I don't think Leave It To Beaver perfectly
represents a Christian Ideal, but as illustration, it seems to beat the
schism, disrespect, autonomy, immorality, and instability of the typical
modern family."  The Cleaver family never existed in real life.  There has 
never been a Ward, June, Wally, and Beaver family.  No family was like that. 
  Ever.                                                                      

                                                       Carl Westberg Jr.

>From: "Michael" <metzler at moscow.com>
>To: <vision2020 at moscow.com>
>Subject: [Vision2020] The crazy side of the line
>Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 09:39:34 -0800
>
>Melynda,
>
>
>
> > By which I presume he means to assert that "American Indians" lacked 
>moral
>standards or high ideals. "Unique cultural sin" looks like the same old
>racism in a new package.
>
>
>
>Their moral view of the world and their understanding of their role in
>changing the world was not of the sort that I imagine would bring out the
>sin of 'hypocrisy' as strong a concern-hypocrisy as we understand it (and 
>we
>borrow from our Christian heritage).
>
>
>
> > When I look at historical documents from the antebellum South I find it
>difficult to come to the conclusion that its primary failing was being too
>darned idealistic.  And when we look past the Civil War through Jim Crow 
>and
>the rise of the lynch mob, respectability looks even less plausible as a 
>key
>note for the culture.  You seem to be claiming that prior to the Civil War,
>the moral climate of the South, despite slavery, was superior to that of 
>the
>North or the West, and that "respectability" is the quality which elevated
>it.
>
>
>
>Because of were this discussion has gone, I'm willing to lump the North and
>South together in comparison to our own; and I wouldn't even know where to
>begin if this comparison is going to be seriously challenged.  Regarding
>hypocrisy, I was simply responding to Keely's argument. But of course,
>hypocrisy is not the sin of "being too darned idealistic."
>
>
>
> > So maybe I'm just not getting what "respectability" signifies, or how it
>can counterbalance the gravity of slavery.
>
>
>
>Please note my argument from modern abortion and Kai's argument from
>classical culture.  I don't think 'counterbalance' is the appropriate term.
>
>
>
> > Note that I'm not asserting that the North was or is free from racism; 
>the
>largest lynch mob ever documented was far above the Mason-Dixon Line. But
>I'm missing a big step in the argument.  Yes, the Civil War had multiple
>causes.  Yes, racism permeates the history of the U.S. in every geographic
>region.  Yes, life is complex.  But how do I get from there to the notion
>that the antebellum South represents a moral high point from which we have
>lamentably declined?
>
>
>
>I think these are important concessions, and I'm glad you have pointed them
>out. But like I said, if it is going to be seriously maintained that we 
>have
>not seen a moral decline in the U.S. over the last 100 years, then, well, I
>guess I don't know where I would begin.  Perhaps then I'll just take the
>first thing that enters my head.  I don't think Leave It To Beaver 
>perfectly
>represents a Christian Ideal, but as illustration, it seems to beat the
>schism, disrespect, autonomy, immorality, and instability of the typical
>modern family.
>
>
>
>Perhaps De Tocqueville can progressively help too:
>
>
>
>Chapter IX
>
>   _____
>
>
>EDUCATION OF YOUNG WOMEN IN THE UNITED STATES
>
>No free communities ever existed without morals, and as I observed in the
>former part of this work, morals are the work of woman. Consequently,
>whatever affects the condition of women, their habits and their opinions,
>has great political importance in my eyes.
>
>   _____
>
>
>
>Among almost all Protestant nations young women are far more the mistresses
>of their own actions than they are in Catholic countries. This independence
>is still greater in Protestant countries like England, which have retained
>or acquired the right of self-government; freedom is then infused into the
>domestic circle by political habits and by religious opinions. In the 
>United
>States the doctrines of Protestantism are combined with great political
>liberty and a most democratic state of society, and nowhere are young women
>surrendered so early or so completely to their own guidance.
>
>Long before an American girl arrives at the marriageable age, her
>emancipation from maternal control begins: she has scarcely ceased to be a
>child when she already thinks for herself, speaks with freedom, and acts on
>her own impulse. The great scene of the world is constantly open to her
>view, far from seeking to conceal it from her, it is every day disclosed
>more completely and she is taught to survey it with a firm and calm gaze.
>Thus the vices and dangers of society are early revealed to her; as she 
>sees
>them clearly, she views them without illusion and braves them without fear,
>for she is full of reliance on her own strength, and her confidence seems 
>to
>be shared by all around her.
>
>An American girl scarcely ever displays that virginal softness in the midst
>of young desires or that innocent and ingenuous grace which usually attend
>the European woman in the transition from girlhood to youth. It is rare 
>that
>an American woman, at any age displays childish timidity or ignorance. Like
>the young women Europe she seeks to please, but she knows precisely the 
>cost
>of pleasing. If she does not abandon herself to evil, at least she knows
>that it exists; and she is remarkable rather for purity of manners than for
>chastity of mind.
>
>I have been frequently surprised and almost frightened at the singular
>address and happy boldness with which young women in America contrive to
>manage their thoughts and their language amid all the difficulties of free
>conversation; a philosopher would have stumbled at every step along the
>narrow path which they trod without accident and without effort. It is 
>easy,
>indeed, to perceive that even amid the independence of early youth an
>American woman is always mistress of herself; she indulges in all permitted
>pleasures without yielding herself up to any of them, and her reason never
>allows the reins of self-guidance to drop, though it often seems to hold
>them loosely.
>
>In France, where traditions of every age are still so strangely mingled in
>the opinions and tastes of the people, women commonly receive a reserved,
>retired, and almost conventional education, as they did in aristocratic
>times; and then they are suddenly abandoned without a guide and without
>assistance in the midst of all the irregularities inseparable from
>democratic society. The Americans are more consistent. They have found out
>that in a democracy the independence of individuals cannot fail to be very
>great, youth premature, tastes ill-restrained, customs fleeting, public
>opinion often unsettled and powerless, paternal authority weak, and marital
>authority contested. Under these circumstances, believing that they had
>little chance of repressing in woman the most vehement passions of the 
>human
>heart, they held that the surer way was to teach her the art of combating
>those passions for herself. As they could not prevent her virtue from being
>exposed to frequent danger, they determined that she should know how best 
>to
>defend it, and more reliance was placed on the free vigor of her will than
>on safeguards which have been shaken or overthrown Instead, then, of
>inculcating mistrust of herself, they constantly seek to enhance her
>confidence in her own strength of character. As it is neither possible nor
>desirable to keep a young woman in perpetual and complete ignorance, they
>hasten to give her a precocious knowledge on all subjects. Far from hiding
>the corruptions of the world from her, they prefer that she should see them
>at once and train herself to shun them, and they hold it of more importance
>to protect her conduct than to be over-scrupulous of the innocence of her
>thoughts.
>
>Although the Americans are a very religious people, they do not rely on
>religion alone to defend the virtue of woman; they seek to arm her reason
>also. In this respect they have followed the same method as in several
>others: they first make vigorous efforts to cause individual independence 
>to
>control itself, and they do not call in the aid of religion until they have
>reached the utmost limits of human strength.
>
>I am aware that an education of this kind is not without danger; I am
>sensible that it tends to invigorate the judgment at the expense of the
>imagination and to make cold and virtuous women instead of affectionate
>wives and agreeable companions to man. Society may be more tranquil and
>better regulated, but domestic life has often fewer charms. These, however,
>are secondary evils, which may be braved for the sake of higher interests.
>At the stage at which we are now arrived, the choice is no longer left to
>us; a democratic education is indispensable to protect women from the
>dangers with which democratic institutions and manners surround them.
>
>
>
>
>

>_____________________________________________________
>  List services made available by First Step Internet,
>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>                http://www.fsr.net
>           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯