On July 15, 1979, Jimmy Carter delivered his infamous nationally televised address, the one derided as the "Malaise Speech" (even though he never used that word). One of the speechwriters remembers its crafting. Excerpt:
To this day, I don't entirely know why the speech came to be derided for a word that was in the air, but never once appeared in the text. Still, the "malaise" label stuck: maybe because President Carter's cabinet shake-up a few days later wasted the political energy that had been focused on our energy problems; maybe because the administration's opponents attached it to the speech relentlessly; maybe because it was just too hard to compete with Ronald Reagan and his banner of limitless American consumption.The real reason is probably that there was never any way the Jimmy Carter we all know would avoid saying: "There is simply no way to avoid sacrifice." Where the speeches of Reagan and Barack Obama evoke the beauty of dreams, President Carter insisted on the realities of responsibility and the need for radical change. Mr. Carter's sense of our own accountability, his warnings about the debilitating effects of self-centered divisiveness were the speech's true heresies. They are also the very elements that keep it relevant today.
Well, Carter was a scold and a drip, but from a philosophically conservative perspective (as opposed to Republican), the speech holds up very well indeed. Read the whole thing and see what you think. Excerpt:
Our people are losing that faith, not only in government itself but in the ability as citizens to serve as the ultimate rulers and shapers of our democracy. As a people we know our past and we are proud of it. Our progress has been part of the living history of America, even the world. We always believed that we were part of a great movement of humanity itself called democracy, involved in the search for freedom, and that belief has always strengthened us in our purpose. But just as we are losing our confidence in the future, we are also beginning to close the door on our past.In a nation that was proud of hard work, strong families, close-knit communities, and our faith in God, too many of us now tend to worship self-indulgence and consumption. Human identity is no longer defined by what one does, but by what one owns. But we've discovered that owning things and consuming things does not satisfy our longing for meaning. We've learned that piling up material goods cannot fill the emptiness of lives which have no confidence or purpose.
The symptoms of this crisis of the American spirit are all around us. For the first time in the history of our country a majority of our people believe that the next five years will be worse than the past five years. Two-thirds of our people do not even vote. The productivity of American workers is actually dropping, and the willingness of Americans to save for the future has fallen below that of all other people in the Western world.
As you know, there is a growing disrespect for government and for churches and for schools, the news media, and other institutions. This is not a message of happiness or reassurance, but it is the truth and it is a warning.

Add to Newsvine
Add to StumbleUpon
Many environmentalists have come around to the idea that nuclear power is necessary and better than some of the alternatives.
That is the kind of stuff that I hate about liberals--they don't even believe their own B.S.!
And that is what a lot of liberals have said about conservatives and the sanctity of marriage. Hypocrisy is bipartisian.
And before anyone screechs that there is a difference between believing in the sanctity of marraige and failing and environmentalism blah blah blah, let me point out that we are talking about values here and people's failures to live up to what they believe in. It is the same thing. I know conservatives (and liberals, too) who are faithful in their marraiges. I know liberals who recycle, drive fuel efficient cars, conserve energy and water use, and so forth. I also know people in both camps who fail to act in accordance with they profess to believe.
stefanie, I'm not up to speed on the latest in nuclear energy technologies. There were legitimate safety concerns and problems with waste disposal earlier on; as I understand it, nuclear plants were basically too expensive to be profitable once all the safety measures and insurance and so forth were factored in. So in effect they had to be government-subsidized. But if those problems have been or can be reliably solved, I for one would not oppose nuclear power in principle. The route we're on clearly has serious costs too -- worse even than they seemed in Carter's day, now that we understand global warming better.
Read up on how the French handle nuclear waste. It's very interesting.
Telling people the truth=scold. Got it.
Steve
Ah, The malaise speech. Something that never fails to depress, yet after eight years of Dubya even this seems a work of profound oratory.
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.