Some thoughts on… Spreading Virulence
With Swine Flu racing around the world, the spread of the virus is on everyone’s mind. The WHO has placed the global public on level 5 for the pandemic indicating that there is sustained human-to-human transmission in communities in different geographical locations. The spread of the disease has claimed 160 lives so far. But there are positive signs of prevalence declining in Mexico – the hypothesized origin of the infections.
As with any virus, the spread needs to be monitored and disease burden managed, to minimize infection. Luckily, accumulated experience from previous contagions has provided an effective platform for the WHO and CDC to help control the infection. As a society, we can effectively contain this particular strain of influenza, but there are other sources of political contamination spreading virulence as well.
In response to the overwhelming popularity of Obama, a few domestic voices are infecting Presidential hatred, and transmitting the messages to millions. The communication is perhaps not as deadly as A-H1N1 but noxious nevertheless. These ultra-conservative voices represent a particularly vehement strain of conservatism whose goal is exclusion of swaths of the US population and misrepresentation of current events.
On principle, the expression of these viewpoints must be supported unless they infringe on individual rights. But, could these voices be more harmful than swine flu?
Ann Coulter a self-described polemicist uses her strong Christian beliefs to defend viewpoints ranging from the need for Jews to be perfected to declaring that any Muslim attending a Mosque in Europe must have an affiliation with radical fundamentalist Islamic group. In her own words, “I'm a Christian first and a mean-spirited, bigoted conservative second, and don't you ever forget it.”
Her recent statements have attempted to counter Obama’s astoundingly strong approval ratings which have been reported by the Wall Street Journal and New York Times. She has argued in a column in the Washington Times that he is the second least popular president, 100 days in, we've had in 40 years. Her comments have been criticized for fallacy in the analysis which compares apples-to-oranges questions from different poll samplings. This is not the first time she has been criticized for spreading misrepresentations, but the damage is done amongst those who take her statements without question and accept them as accurate representations of reality.
Rush Limbaugh the conservative TV and Radio host has proved to be a good foil for the current administration. Referring to Obama as “Barack the Magic Negro” and demonstratively stating that he hoped the President would fail, he represents a strong voice of societal fear of the other. Differing from Ann Coulter’s denigration of cultures outside of Christianity, Limbaugh’s perspectives ring as exclusionary and divisive on numerous fronts. On the front page of his website, there is a pictorial commentary of the criteria for Supreme Court nomination:
Being several of the above categories myself, it is incredible to imagine that this is seen as a joke. Why shouldn’t someone from all the above categories be a Supreme Court judge as long as they are capable? Inherently it represents a belief that only rich, white and male candidates are qualified for the High Court further denigrating the diversity that our country represents.
These folks have every right to express their views, and it is our responsibility to counter when we hear them. Spreading misrepresentation and divisiveness may not be killing lives, but they are painful infections against which we need inoculation. A constructive interpretation is that these perspectives are the necessary ills needed by society to gain immunity for the next wave of challenge to the system.
May 2, 2009
As with any virus, the spread needs to be monitored and disease burden managed, to minimize infection. Luckily, accumulated experience from previous contagions has provided an effective platform for the WHO and CDC to help control the infection. As a society, we can effectively contain this particular strain of influenza, but there are other sources of political contamination spreading virulence as well.
In response to the overwhelming popularity of Obama, a few domestic voices are infecting Presidential hatred, and transmitting the messages to millions. The communication is perhaps not as deadly as A-H1N1 but noxious nevertheless. These ultra-conservative voices represent a particularly vehement strain of conservatism whose goal is exclusion of swaths of the US population and misrepresentation of current events.
On principle, the expression of these viewpoints must be supported unless they infringe on individual rights. But, could these voices be more harmful than swine flu?
Ann Coulter a self-described polemicist uses her strong Christian beliefs to defend viewpoints ranging from the need for Jews to be perfected to declaring that any Muslim attending a Mosque in Europe must have an affiliation with radical fundamentalist Islamic group. In her own words, “I'm a Christian first and a mean-spirited, bigoted conservative second, and don't you ever forget it.”
Her recent statements have attempted to counter Obama’s astoundingly strong approval ratings which have been reported by the Wall Street Journal and New York Times. She has argued in a column in the Washington Times that he is the second least popular president, 100 days in, we've had in 40 years. Her comments have been criticized for fallacy in the analysis which compares apples-to-oranges questions from different poll samplings. This is not the first time she has been criticized for spreading misrepresentations, but the damage is done amongst those who take her statements without question and accept them as accurate representations of reality.
Rush Limbaugh the conservative TV and Radio host has proved to be a good foil for the current administration. Referring to Obama as “Barack the Magic Negro” and demonstratively stating that he hoped the President would fail, he represents a strong voice of societal fear of the other. Differing from Ann Coulter’s denigration of cultures outside of Christianity, Limbaugh’s perspectives ring as exclusionary and divisive on numerous fronts. On the front page of his website, there is a pictorial commentary of the criteria for Supreme Court nomination:
Being several of the above categories myself, it is incredible to imagine that this is seen as a joke. Why shouldn’t someone from all the above categories be a Supreme Court judge as long as they are capable? Inherently it represents a belief that only rich, white and male candidates are qualified for the High Court further denigrating the diversity that our country represents.
These folks have every right to express their views, and it is our responsibility to counter when we hear them. Spreading misrepresentation and divisiveness may not be killing lives, but they are painful infections against which we need inoculation. A constructive interpretation is that these perspectives are the necessary ills needed by society to gain immunity for the next wave of challenge to the system.
May 2, 2009