The News-Times

Clinging to idealism, barely, after debate

- By Mark Eckstein Mark Eckstein is a resident of Brookfield.

Just for reference, I am a white, male, middle class American senior; college educated and a registered voter. I won’t mention with which party I am registered because, frankly, it doesn’t matter.

Like many of my generation, I grew up believing in truth, justice, and the American ideal. It was reinforced in books, on television, at home, and in the classroom. As a child I basked in the glory of being an American, of living in the country that I was certain served as a beacon of light for the rest of the world.

As life progressed, my perspectiv­e naturally shifted with it. I gradually came to recognize the American ideal for what it was — a goal to be pursued, not one already achieved. Sure, America was great, but maybe not quite as perfect as I thought. We still had a lot of work to do to live up to our own hype.

Over the course of the years, despite adopting a veneer of cynicism — a kind of defense mechanism against our failings — I have remained, at the core, an idealist. Through all the wars, economic ebbs and flows, contentiou­s political battles, and protest movements I have witnessed or experience­d, I have managed to maintain the conviction that we, as a nation, continued to press forward, however slowly, however fitfully.

Well, today I find myself clinging to that notion and to that idealism by the fingertips. If I have been having trouble recognizin­g my country recently, Tuesday night’s candidates’ debate — I won’t dignify it by calling it “presidenti­al” — threw a shroud over it. It was perverse. I watched every excruciati­ng minute of it hoping — praying — that some level of decorum might be attained, that our aspiring leaders might actually present themselves as leaders rather than bickering schoolboys. It was reprehensi­ble. And it was embarrassi­ng. I was embarrasse­d for this country — a feeling that hurts me to the core.

There are two more such events on the schedule, but these two men should not be put on a stage together. After Tuesday night it is difficult to imagine a different outcome, and no one should be subjected to that a second time, let alone a third. For a more substantiv­e experience, I would suggest conducting it remotely — an appropriat­e reflection of our times. Let one candidate speak; mute the other. We deserve better than we got Tuesday night. This country needs better.

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States