« Ralph Nader's enemies strike again | Main | Nader accepts Michigan GOP signatures »
July 19, 2004
Two different kinds of optimism
If you're like me, you might have been struck by the way both the Bush-Cheney and Kerry-Edwards campaigns are using the word "optimism" so much in this campaign. It seems odd that both sides can be using the same word, but applying such different meanings to it. To quote Ellen Goodman of the Washington Post:
The "ins" attach optimism to the status quo and equate criticism with pessimism. The "outs" attach optimism to change.
In part, it may be a matter of the tense. Bush and Cheney are talking about the present when they refer to optimism. Kerry and Edwards are talking about the future when they say they're optimistic. So who's right? Well, really they both are. It just depends on which definition of optimism you apply, and the difference between the two definitions says a lot about the difference between the two campaigns.
op·ti·mism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (pt-mzm)n.
1-A tendency to expect the best possible outcome or dwell on the most hopeful aspects of a situation: “There is a touch of optimism in every worry about one's own moral cleanliness” (Victoria Ocampo).
2-Philosophy.
a-The doctrine, asserted by Leibnitz, that this world is the best of all possible worlds.
b-The belief that the universe is improving and that good will ultimately triumph over evil.
Clearly, the Bush-Cheney campaign is embracing the definition of Leibnitz, while the Kerry-Edwards campaign is embracing the alternative philosophy.
This is not a new debate. Here is some background on the Leibnitz view:
Candide parodies the philosophy of optimism put forth by Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibnitz. This philosophy states that since God created the world and God is perfect, everything in the world is ultimately perfect. Voltaire had already attacked this philosophy of optimism in his poem on the 1756 Lisbon earthquake. Rousseau answered the poem with a letter, which was leaked to the press, saying it was Voltaire who was mistaken. Voltaire answered back three years later with the tale of Candide. The tale is a fantastic picaresque journey that takes Candide around the world. After he and his friends are killed, they are brought back to life; first rich, then poor; and finally, they wind up on a farm in Turkey.
Here is a quote from the book:
Seeing an abused African slave stretched out on the road before them, the two question him, and learn that a very religious Christian man is his master. Hearing this, Candide admits to himself, “I’m through, I must give up [Pangloss’] optimism after all... It is a mania for saying things are well when one is in hell.”
I've never read Candide, but it sounds like Voltaire might agree more with the alternate, Neoclassical view of optimism:
The Neoclassicals were generally optimistic; they thought that using their reason they could solve all problems and construct just social structures and laws that would allow people to live their lives in security and contentment. Optimism was also the name of one of the period’s principal philosophies.
It seems to originate in the ancient debate between destiny and free will. Either you believe everything is as good as it will ever be, as far as societal rules and norms of governance are concerned, or you believe that through reason and logic we can eventually solve our problems and create a just society.
Democrats or progressives believe that we can build a more just society that gives all of its citizens an equal opportunity to succeed and breaks down barriers when they arise. Republicans or conservatives believe that things are just fine the way they are and the status quo should be maintained. In other words, it all comes back to which definition of "optimism" you use.
John Edwards talking about optimism:
We need to offer the American people more than the crass politics of greed or the current politics of rage - we need to offer them a new politics of possibility. Elections are about the future. Elections are a contest of ideas. Whether it’s the “New Deal” or a new drive to save our working middle class and our way of life, ideas and principles matter to voters....If all we are in 2004 is a party of anger, we can’t win. Democrats are the party of optimism and action, and I am in this fight to keep that tradition alive, and to build on our country’s great successes.
Because I believe in an America where every man, woman, and child can reach his or her God-given potential. I believe in an America where the family you’re born into and the color of your skin should never control your destiny. And I still believe in an America where the son of a mill worker can beat the son of a president to win the White House!
Dick Cheney talking about optimism:
Cheney says GOP full of optimismMINNEAPOLIS -- The fall election will present a choice between hope and negativism, Vice President Dick Cheney told a crowd of more than 1,000 Republican faithful at a Minneapolis rally yesterday morning.
''What we're hearing from the other side is the failed thinking of the past," Cheney said in his 25-minute speech from the Minneapolis Convention Center. ''And we're not going back."
Well, it sounds like Cheney understands what the right side is, he's just not on it!
GOP Urged to Sharpen Message on EconomyBy Dan Balz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, July 19, 2004; Page A04SEATTLE, July 18 -- Republicans risk losing the economic debate in this year's election unless they shift their focus from trying to convince voters that the economy is improving and engage Democrats directly over how to create jobs and expand growth in the future, Republican governors were told here this weekend.
GOP pollster Bill McInturff, in a Saturday briefing for the Republican Governors Association, presented survey results showing that voters are far more responsive to Sen. John F. Kerry's economic message that talks about a middle-class squeeze than to President Bush's efforts to change public perceptions by talking up recent economic statistics.Republicans have been hoping that, with improving economic statistics, Bush will gain politically, but GOP governors agreed with McInturff's conclusion that voters are not ready for such a message.
Posted by Mike at July 19, 2004 02:28 PM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.topdog08.com/cgi-bin/mt-trackback.cgi/364
Comments
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)