I don't like Tony Blair. I consider him the British lapdog of the conservative American Presidents.
I saw him on the Daily Show with John Stewart. My esteem has increased a bit, from the sheer fact that he was willing to debate. Years past 9-11, I have had no greater understanding of the conservative position/ideology than I did years ago. This interview with Tony Blair increased my understanding of the position. Don't misunderstand, I know Tony Blair was posturing, and he was defending an indefensible argument. But, I celebrate his willingness to debate.
Debate in the American media is almost non existent especially when interviewers are asking questions of politicians. I've come to the conclusion that debate takes a high degree of trust. Both parties must feel safe for people to debate. One refuses to debate when one doesn't feel the position is defendable or one doesn't trust in the value of the argument. Only our emotions rule when debate is absent. Currently, our administration does not trust the American people enough to engage in debate. The major media outlets asks relatively safe questions of our decision makers to ensure accessibility on the next news cast. It is amazing that the only debate on nationwide mainstream television is on a pseudo news program meant for comedy. I hope the new administration values debate and does not stifle dissent with quite the surgeons precision the current administration has achieved. Debate and dissent are necessary, now more than ever.
2 comments:
Hey Walt,
I agree about the need to debate.
The irony of Tony Blair is that he is from the, supposedly, non-conservative, Labor party (like Kevin Rudd).
I suspect that he was/is so in line with Bush (and Howard) ideologically, because all three have/had a 'placed here by God to do his work' view of their mandate.
This is demonstrated by the repeated use of "I do/did (insert any major policy decision here) because it was the 'right' thing to do." A position that closes the door on any rational debate.
Interesting that Tony Blair converted to catholicism shortly after leaving office.
Phil
Well I am finally getting around to giving my two cents. I happen to agree because I had the same reaction as you when seeing this on tv originally. We can debate on all day about the state of debate today, but I agree that he answered tough questions in a way that is very rare in modern US politics. I do not agree with him, but miss that kind of exchange. I also do not see such debate between us common people like I used to. I used to enjoy that sort of conversation.
Art
Post a Comment