The man in the street: Papers on American topicsNicholson, Meredith
General
The man in the street: Papers on American topics
Nicholson, Meredith
American essays -- 20th century
There is no way of knowing how many of our hundred millions ever read
a national platform, but I will hazard the guess that not more than
twenty-five per cent have perused the platforms of 1920 or will do
so before election day. The average voter is content to accept the
interpretations and laudatory comment of his party paper, with its
assurance that the declaration of principles and purposes is in keeping
with the great traditions of the grand old party. It is straining
Smith’s patriotism pretty far to ask him to read a solid page of small
type, particularly when he knows that much of it is untrue and most of
it sheer bunk. Editorial writers and campaign orators read platforms
perforce; but to Smith they are fatiguing to the eye and a weariness
to the spirit. The primary qualification for membership on a platform
committee is an utter lack--there must be no question about it--of a
sense of humor. The League of Nations plank of the Republican platform
is a refutation of the fallacy that we are a people singularly blessed
with humor. We could ask no more striking proof of the hypnotic power
of a party name than the acceptance of this plank, solemnly sawed,
trimmed, and painted red, white, and blue, in the committee-room, and
received by the delegates with joyous acclamation.
III
The embarrassments of the partisan who is challenged to explain the
faith that is in him are greatly multiplied in this year of grace.
Considerable literature is available as to the rise and development
of the two major parties, but a student might exhaust the whole of
it and yet read the Chicago and San Francisco platforms as through a
glass darkly. There is a good deal of Jeffersonian democracy that is
extremely difficult to reconcile with many acts of Mr. Wilson. The
partisan who tries to square his Democracy or his Republicanism with
the faith he inherited from his grandfather is doomed to a severe
headache. The rope that separates the elephant from the donkey in the
menagerie marks only a nominal difference in species: they eat the
same fodder and, when the spectator’s back is turned, slyly wink at
each other. There is a fine ring to the phrase “a loyal Republican”
or “a loyal Democrat,” but we have reached a point of convergence
where loyalty is largely a matter of tradition and superstition.
What Jefferson said on a given point, or what Hamilton thought about
something else, avails little to a Democrat or a Republican in these
changed times. We talk blithely of fundamental principles, but are
still without the power to visualize the leaders of the past in newly
developed situations of which they never dreamed. To attempt to
interview Washington as to whether he intended his warning against
entangling alliances to apply to a League of Nations to insure the
peace of the world is ridiculous; as well invoke Julius Cæsar’s opinion
of present-day questions of Italian politics.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account