COMMENTARY: WHAT THE ELECTION REALLY TELLS US
by Ivy Scarborough

In an article released today, Ivy Scarborough, lawyer, TV and print commentator, and former professor of government and international studies, draws pointed and incisive observations about what the election tells us about ourselves as Americans and about our media.

Mr. Scarborough: “The 2004 American election was a rebuke. The evidence is compelling that millions of Americans reject policies and positions which conflict with traditional principles of morality.”

The reasons for this rejection are summed up: “It has now been repeatedly observed that fear drove this election and motivated the American people to vote. But fear, in the sense of anxiety about terrorism, Iraq, and the economy, was subordinate to fear of that relativistic view and where it would take the nation – places that probably the majority of Americans wisely do not want to go.”

A second insight afforded by the election sheds light on the American media: “The election also provides evidence that who Americans are has been distorted by a media and entertainment industry which is hostile to those traditional principles.”
“This is the second and alarming lesson to be learned from our election year experience. A democracy can only function well when the citizenry are well informed. Fair and unbiased media are critical to that function.”

Mr. Scarborough asserts that: “This leaves us with two compelling questions: Will the Democratic Party recognize that its political success is contingent on turning away from policies and positions which defy the fundamental moral views of probably a majority of Americans or will it persist in its foolish and atavistic course? Will the American media recognize the gulf between their perceptions of morality and reality and correct their course accordingly, or, at least, cloak themselves once again in a mantle of professional objectivity? “

The gravity and significance of these considerations supersede all others: “No issue or category of issues is as critical to the future of the nation as these. Every dimension of American life – not simply the family and the church – has been profoundly influenced by those moral principles and values.”

“To the extent they are eroded the superstructure of our civilization is weakened. In the long run, this will detrimentally affect every dimension of American life, not simply the obvious areas of family, moral behavior, crime and the church.

All political and historical considerations – no matter how much weight they may be given by politicians, the media or even the people themselves - are eclipsed by these.”

Scarborough is an attorney from Jackson, TN, a former adjunct professor of international studies at Union University, and a writer and TV/radio commentator on a variety of issues, including terrorism, foreign affairs, and national defense. He has done extensive reporting and observation from the world's war zones and hot spots including Afghanistan (1985), El Salvador (1988), Honduran-Nicaraguan border during contra wars (1989), Israel during the Gulf War (1991), Russia, Georgia (1983), Somalia (1993), Bosnia (1993), Sudan (1998) and Kosovo (1999). He is used by the military as a lecturer on topics such as the Afghan war, international crises, and terrorism and conducted briefings on Afghanistan immediately after Sept. 11, 2001.
www.ivyscarborough.com

WHAT THE ELECTION REALLY TELLS US
by Ivy Scarborough

The 2004 American election was a rebuke. The evidence is compelling that millions of Americans reject policies and positions which conflict with traditional principles of morality. The existence of a deep schism within the nation is beyond dispute, but the reasons for that divide have been the subject of endless speculation, much of it superficial. Emerson once observed, “Beneath each depth, a greater depth lies.” That greater depth reveals dramatically different world views primarily distinguished on one hand by the conviction that faith and moral principles are absolutes and not subject to amendment even in a democracy, and a relativistic view that, at its core, sees man as the arbiter of his world and his fate. There are nuances to this simplified depiction, but even when added to the calculation this basic understanding remains intact.
It has now been repeatedly observed that fear drove this election and motivated the American people to vote. But fear, in the sense of anxiety about terrorism, Iraq, and the economy, was subordinate to fear of that relativistic view and where it would take the nation – places that probably the majority of Americans wisely do not want to go.
The election also provides evidence that who Americans are has been distorted by a media and entertainment industry which is hostile to those traditional principles. Observers who view America solely through the prism of the media and entertainment industries would likely conclude that 21st Century Americans have dramatically shifted away from their historic adherence to Judeo-Christian moral principles. The election not only disproved this, to a greater or lesser degree, but also gave us some insight into how distorted has been the depiction of the American soul by some branches of the media.

The extent and dimensions of that distortion are unclear and open to speculation, but one reality is manifest: the American media (speaking generically and not comprehensively) and the American people are of two different characters. Many branches of the former have done a great disservice to the latter by their insistence on promoting their own moral views – usually with a hypocritical declaration of objectivity and fairness.

This is the second and alarming lesson to be learned from our election year experience. A democracy can only function well when the citizenry are well informed. Fair and unbiased media are critical to that function. If citizens are given inaccurate, incomplete or biased perspectives, their ability to make sound judgments consistent with their own values and best interests is undermined. Many years ago when traveling in the then-Soviet Union, Russians told me an oft-repeated joke about their own media. The major newspapers were Pravda (Russian for “truth”) and Izvestia (Russian for “news”). Russians were cynical about both and would declare: “There is no truth in Pravda and no news in Izvestia.” Similar cynicism and skepticism about the media can grow – and to a considerable extent already has - even in our free democracy.

This leaves us with two compelling questions: Will the Democratic Party recognize that its political success is contingent on turning away from policies and positions which defy the fundamental moral views of probably a majority of Americans, or will it persist in its foolish and atavistic course? Surely there will be no reform in their policies due to a “great awakening” in the moral sense, but pragmatic calculations typically are very influential with those who crave power.

The second question is related to the first: Will the American media recognize the gulf between their perceptions of morality and reality and those of many Americans and correct their course accordingly? Or, will they, at least, attempt to cloak themselves once again in a mantle of professional objectivity? Here America has less reason for optimism. Whereas the Democratic Party wants power and is therefore more likely to act pragmatically to acquire it, the media sees itself as securely possessing power and thus will feel little pressure to accommodate the wishes – or needs – of the American people for greater objectivity and fairness. Indeed, their more likely course will be a gradual sloughing off of the vestiges of professed objectivity. Some media outlets will become more overtly conservative and proRepublican; others will become less concerned with continuing the charade and will expose their leftist and Democratic biases. In time, America may end up with a large segment of the media overtly polarized along ideological lines and openly advocating for their “team”.

The election also suggests that even many Americans who are not religious are alarmed by the rejection of moral values. They sense intuitively that something is wrong and that nothing good can come of it for them and their families.

No issue or category of issues is as critical to the future of the nation as these. Americans may debate on many topics - economic issues, taxation, foreign policy, environmental issues - and do so with some well-founded conviction that their views are as sound and promising as anyone else’s. But to attack, or even question, moral principles established and sustained for millennia by the Judeo-Christian faiths is to threaten the foundation of Western civilization itself. Every dimension of American life – not simply the family and the church – has been profoundly influenced by those moral principles and values. Our legal system, our economic system and our understandings of labor and the work ethic, our views of self-sacrifice and discipline which are critical to our military readiness, and our notions of government are all predicated on those timeless values and principles.

To the extent they are eroded, the superstructure of our civilization is weakened. In the long run, this will detrimentally affect every dimension of American life, not simply the obvious areas of family, moral behavior, crime and the church.

All political and historical considerations – no matter how much weight they may be given by politicians, the media or even the people themselves - are eclipsed by these.