Rolling Stone Responds to My Challenge (by Gareth Higgins)
It's not often that something I write attracts an immediate response from one of the most famous media entities in the world, but surprisingly enough, just after my recent post calling for our popular culture to propose concrete and distinctive opportunities for progressive activism, Rolling Stone magazine published a 40th anniversary issue that includes interviews suggesting just that. It's amazing how influential the God's Politics blog is becoming, almost as amazing as how quickly RS was able to produce this issue in what was surely a response to my own article. Next month they'll be dedicating their issue to the most humble bloggers they can find.
Just kidding, of course, but until then here are some of the suggestions that the featured stars are making as predictions for "where we're going":
Meryl Streep: "It's in the power of the great universities and colleges to plant ideas and curiosity and not just be mills for turning out hedge fund managers."
Bill Maher: "Nothing will change until the 71 million people who didn't vote in 2004 start to vote."
Chris Rock: "Hopefully the new president will get the troops back. I've got a first cousin who just came home from Iraq .... There's nothing sadder than having [the] party before somebody goes off to war. That's basically what it is: 'Please don't die .... Come back.'"
George Clooney: "'My country right or wrong' is not an option anymore .... [I] don't want to be on the wrong side of history.... I'm always afraid of [saying] 'I was stoning the witches, because it was easier.'"
Bruce Springsteen: "Our moral authority to stand up and say 'We are the Americans' has been deeply damaged."
Jon Stewart: "The reason I don't worry about society is, 19 people knocked down two buildings and killed thousands. Hundreds of people ran into those buildings to save them. I'll take those odds every day."
Granted, these interviews are printed on pages squeezed between the latest "beautiful people are better than you – buy more/spend more and you will feel superior about the world – what you really need is a HUMMER" ads, but at least RS is trying.
It's good that there are figures in our popular culture who are beginning to understand that change will require something other than armchair liberalism. That the common good requires each of us to go the extra mile. Rolling Stone editor Jann S. Wenner writes in an editorial,
We cry out for good leadership. For the past seven years we have been fed a diet of fear and falsehood. We have been led into a war with neither purpose nor success .... Our president has stood numb [in the face of] evidence of catastrophic climate change .... We have watched Congress and the press become weak ... handmaidens to those who would rip apart the fabric and laws of our democratic society .... We don't need leaders who wear flag pins in their lapels, but rather men and women who have the guts to tell us the truth .... We hunger for the restoration of hope and common sense and purpose.
Could a first step toward restoring that hope be inspired by Bono's comment in the magazine: "Isn't it cheaper and smarter to make friends out of potential enemies than to defend yourself against them later?"
Gareth Higgins is a Christian writer and activist in Belfast, Northern Ireland. For the past decade he was the founder/director of the zero28 project, an initiative addressing questions of peace, justice, and culture. He is the author of the insightful How Movies Helped Save My Soul and blogs at www.godisnotelsewhere.blogspot.com
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Comments
Re: Bono: And what better way to make friends than through unilateral free trade?
Re: Jon Stewart: I like those odds, too. Fear is debilitating.
I'm sure RS will now publish an article based on my comments...
Nathanael Snow
ndsnow@gmail.com
Posted by: jurisnaturalist | November 23, 2007 11:29 AM
"It's good that there are figures in our popular culture who are beginning to understand that change will require something other than armchair liberalism. That the common good requires each of us to go the extra mile."
Hmmm. "The common good requires each of us. . .". Sounds an awful lot like individualistic, compassionate, one-on-one conservatism to me!!! Maybe Rolling Stone is learning.
Posted by: joekc | November 23, 2007 12:01 PM
"Isn't it cheaper and smarter to make friends out of potential enemies than to defend yourself against them later?"
Perhaps Rolling Stone should take Bono's advice and quit saying that Conservative Evangelicals are enemies of the state. But of course, what this quote means is that we should dialogue with Iran, not Jim Dobson.
Posted by: Ben Wheaton | November 23, 2007 12:08 PM
It is "progressive activism" that has our society at this point in history looking exactly like that of Lot's neighbors in ancient Sodom. Your blindness is unbelievable Jim. LOOK at the people being quoted. In the days when I followed Rolling Stone Magazine's, Streep's, Maher's and Springsteen's et al, and Hollywood's role modeling, I followed a life opposite of what a Christian should live. Hollywood can only role model debauchery.
You're as blinded by the powerful as Bush is Jim.
When I, followed James Dobson's sound advice, my children have had a father married to their own mother (um, I am the father if these children by the way, I know I have to say that these days) since their conception. Until you get quote from good people Jim, you're just peddling the same old hedonism in a comfy old man package. Time to wake up Mr. Wallis. You're not leading people anywhere good.
Posted by: Donny | November 23, 2007 12:41 PM
Why not quote King Bera too?
Posted by: Abram | November 23, 2007 12:46 PM
I'm sorry, but publishing comments for a Rolling Stone forum is the very definition of armchair liberalism. Which is fine. I prefer liberalism from an armchair.
"It's in the power of the great universities and colleges to plant ideas and curiosity and not just be mills for turning out hedge fund managers."
I think undergraduate college and unversities have long since ceased to inculcate students with any employable skill. Perhaps if colleges took less seriously their status as a "rite of passage" and spent more time actually educating their high-minded idealists, tomorrow's hedge fund managers might operate in accordance with some manner of conscience.
"Nothing will change until the 71 million people who didn't vote in 2004 start to vote."
I can't wait to see what happens when we throw 71 million of the least politically informed people in America join the electoral fray. I guess the assumption amongst liberals is that their ideological kin will be elected in droves. They might be surprised with the results, and not in a "hurray for Democracy!" sort of way.
"'My country right or wrong' is not an option anymore .... [I] don't want to be on the wrong side of history.... I'm always afraid of [saying] 'I was stoning the witches, because it was easier.'"
The always reasonable George Clooney, ladies and gentleman. What amuses me is that millions of people read this and think "how wise, how wise... Clooney shames us all."
"Our moral authority to stand up and say 'We are the Americans' has been deeply damaged."
This doesn't actually make sense, strictly speaking. I know what he's saying, but this sentence doesn't make sense.
"The reason I don't worry about society is, 19 people knocked down two buildings and killed thousands. Hundreds of people ran into those buildings to save them. I'll take those odds every day."
There we go. Think Jon Stewart ever wonders to himself, "self, how did I become the idol for millions of people who are utterly bananas? I mean, I'm an even-handed intelligent person. Why are my fans cuckoo?" I bet he does.
Posted by: kevin s. | November 23, 2007 4:44 PM
Really! Who wants those 71 million people to vote anyway? That's like saying we'd want them to go to church!
Posted by: jimmy paravane | November 23, 2007 6:47 PM
"Really! Who wants those 71 million people to vote anyway? That's like saying we'd want them to go to church!"
No, it's like saying we'd want 71 million people who had little interest in Christianity to determine the leadership of our churches, to the extent that you can draw this parallel at all.
Posted by: kevin s. | November 23, 2007 7:49 PM
Australia just elected a new Prime Minister (well we didn't elect him directly, but we elected his party who elected him).
We have compulsory voting, and I know of no Australians who would have it any other way.
It has three great benefits: the result is never contested (as in, only 20% of the country voted for him anyway); all political parties take into account those who don't vote in your system; and all Australians are better informed politically.
It addresses Kevin s. concerns and as he predicted, it doesn't guarantee results go one way or the other. But it also means that no political party can overlook the needs of ay constituents by saying to themselves "it's ok, they don't vote anyway."
and while the celebrities listed by RS may not have great credibility, the fact is that they are celebrities and they are listened to. It is nice when famous people think the same things as you do. Doesn't make those thoughts any better or more valid, but it does ensure those thoughts will get a wider audience.
Be Blessed,
Posted by: Trent | November 25, 2007 10:38 PM
"and all Australians are better informed politically."
All Australians?
Compulsory voting wouldn't work here. Not so sure it will work there either, in the long term, but I know it would not work here.
Posted by: kevin s. | November 26, 2007 1:21 AM
Most of the comments that go beyond just criticism presume that everyone in the world is rational and can be reasoned with. That is just plain stunned. When a madman wants you dead, you have to make a decision, "do I role over and die, or do I fight". Most of the reasoning and rhetoric seems to deny the reality that the world isn't what we would like it to be, and that a democrat president can't change it.
Posted by: Elim | November 26, 2007 1:47 PM
"It is "progressive activism" that has our society at this point in history looking exactly like that of Lot's neighbors in ancient Sodom. Your blindness is unbelievable Jim."
You may not have noticed, Donny, but this blog was written by Gareth.
Posted by: Tony Dickinson | November 26, 2007 4:22 PM
Kevin s.
are all Australians better informed politically than all US citizens, no. Is an average Australian citizen better informed than an average US citizen, yes.
I might have phrased it poorly. It would probably be fair to say that in a situation with compulsory voting the fear you mention (70000 uninformed voters) does not eventuate.
Why wouldn't it work there? I can see that you'd need to streamline your voting processes (have the same rules in each state for instance) but they're not insurmountable difficulties.
Be Blessed,
Posted by: Trent | November 26, 2007 10:19 PM
It's nice that RS is throwing little morsels toward social change, but I really think they are part of the problem. Consumerism, celebrity, hedonism, apathy... they promote most of the things that are wrong with this society. It's hard to even consider them liberal in any meaningful sense of the word--they are liberal as long as it doesn't affect their salaries or their advertising revenue.
When younger people ask me what they can do to help make the world a better place, one of the first things i tell them is to turn off the TV and stop reading magazines like Rolling Stone.
Posted by: I and I | November 27, 2007 9:49 AM
Isn't RS editor Jann Wenner a charismatic Catholic?
Posted by: cheyenne bodie | November 27, 2007 3:28 PM
God is with us always. And recognizing that spiritual truth is essential.
Posted by: james warren | November 29, 2007 10:58 PM
Post a Comment
Are you aware of our Rules of Conduct?