Friends, many conservatives will be familiar with the furor that was caused by ABC's cancellation of the sitcom Last Man Standing, starring Tim Allen as a conservative white male who was, shockingly, portrayed as a decent human being. Fans of the show petitioned for it to be resurrected, and now it has been...by Fox, no less! This is some rare good news from Hollywood. Waddyheads across the land will be nodding approvingly.
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/last-man-standing-resurrected-fox-194553456.html
Dr. Waddy: I knew nothing about this show before your post and the appended article. From what I can see, this, together with Roseanne redux may be a welcome harbinger of a grudging realization by much of the broadcast media that Fox was right (so to speak); the real America is REAL and it rejects the man hating bitterness of radical feminists. Their vindictive insanity may well go the way of the once fashionable anti military dreck (eg MASH) which the TV types had, of much resented necessity, to suppress, because the public was simply not going to stand for it anymore. One of the pillars of the "keep men who are in any way traditional in their place as second class citizens movement" has been that cadre of diffident, apologetic and spineless males who have assented to this nonsense. A popular example of a man who says, without qualification, NO! to that, is a very good thing. Equality before the law and of opportunity free of unreasonable impediment for all, yes; dominance by any except those earn merit, hell no! I see a strong possibility, enhanced by our conservative President's success, of an increasing marginalization of those who simply assume that conservative views are obviously morally reprehensible and presume that anyone who disagrees is "icky".
ReplyDeleteHmm. I'm not sure I agree, Jack. In many quarters, it appears to me that it's we conservatives who are increasingly marginalized... It depends on the circles you move in. Anyway, this is one manifestation of popular culture of which I was not totally oblivious. I watched and enjoyed LMS. Frankly, though, to call it a "conservative show" would be a great exaggeration. There were (mildly) liberal and conservative characters on the show, all of whom were portrayed more or less sympathetically. And that, I suppose,is what made the show "toxic" at ABC: conservatives were not dismissed out of hand.
ReplyDeleteDr. Waddy:In being free for 15 years now from the library profession I found to be infested with radicals and their unmitigated biases and in living in this very conservative area, I may well have a ,uh, "protected" viewpoint. May well be that the trend is not as favorable as I see it.
ReplyDeleteIt's all a matter of perspective, Jack. Sometimes I think about what my life would be like if I taught on one of those campuses infested with neo-fascist leftwing bigots. It wouldn't be pretty! I honestly think the trend isn't towards one side or the other -- it's towards polarization and self-isolation. Not good for democracy.
ReplyDeleteDr. Waddy: In some ways that intriguing view reminds me of those of Pat Buchanan. I understand him to believe there to be decisive trend in the world toward Balkanization and assertion of nationalism old and new and great and small and of extranational identities with the same parameters. A commentator on American Thinker said he thinks the prospect of the United States staying united is bleak. I've only got about 15 years more so it probably won't effect me but I'd hate to be a conservative in the NY SSR when it happens. A liberal columnist a few years ago said "there may well come a time when we must amicably agree to part in recognition of the fact that we no longer belong together". That did not work out well in India. The rump US would remain democratic but the People's Republic of the North American Littoral would assuredly be totalitarian.
ReplyDeleteJack -- secession would solve a lot of problems, but it would introduce one very big one: where to draw the borders between the United States of Traditional Values versus the People's Republic of Political Correctness. I'm not sure doing it state-by-state would make a great deal of sense. We could cut the major metros loose and what we conservatives would be left with would be viable, but could those cities make it as city-states? No idea. I think it's more likely that one side will impose its will on the other, and frankly I like our chances, if the chips are down... We have all the guns, after all.
ReplyDeleteDr. Waddy: I think we have the guns because we are the ones with our feet firmly situated on the good earth. Within the assured real America would be enclaves like Ithaca, Ann Arbor, Chicago, Bloomington, Boulder and such but, much as the oyster does, we could surround them with gentle but certain restraints on their galling impulses. This may just happen, with an inevitability now evident in the breakup of the "Soviet Union".
ReplyDeleteI don't know about "inevitability", Jack, but it's certainly a possibility. All societies are led by elites, though, and our elite is decidedly left-leaning. Trump should be seen for what he is: a populist. That is precisely why so many elitists seek his destruction...
ReplyDeleteDr. Waddy: In 1965 we read The Power Elite by C.Wright Mills in Introduction to Political Science. Haven't reread it but I would guess his identification of elites might be somewhat out of date; the premise in the title probably isn't. How amazed we would have been then to see what new elites have risen.
ReplyDeleteQuite! The elite ain't what it used to be. I have to admit, I'm not reflexively scornful of elites. I think every society needs an elite, and, given that life in America is pretty darn good, our elite shouldn't be as despised as it is. Be that as it may, the elite has been hoodwinked by "progressivism," and it's time to give it a crash course in common sense!
ReplyDeleteDr. Waddy: I think as long as a decisive elite is composed mainly of those who have earned that status by rigorous effort and deserved merit, then a society is healthy but the last 50 years in the U.S. raise this caveat: What if that elite, convinced by guilt and an overemphasis in its education on the ,yes, nonetheless, considerable negative aspects of Western history, determines to destroy that which esconsed them? Frankly, so many of them cannot comprehend the eye gouging, testicle crushing "realpolitik" in practice of those they admire in this misplaced sentiment. Then those excoriated and targeted by these murderous snobs must overpower them. An exemplar of this thinking is President now.
ReplyDeleteYes, if the elite turns on the very society that it's entrusted to lead, all bets are off. This has happened before, and many times. The common result, as I see it, is eventual societal collapse. We would be very lucky to turn the corner and rebuild our self-confidence and re-affirm our core values. Reagan did some of that in the 80s. Maybe we can do it again.
ReplyDelete