02-18-2004, 05:50 PM
(This post was last modified: 02-18-2004, 05:53 PM by Chaerophon.)
I don't know Occhi, it DOES seem passing strange that the later states in the primaries know what the vote looks like before it gets to them in this modern era of mass communications. Let's face it, by the time we get through New England and the first Southern States, momentum, the "Big Mo'" as George H.W. once called it, has already, the majority of the time, determined who's going to win. All of the state by state canvassing doesn't enlighten anyone once one of the candidates starts to steamroll as Kerry has begun to do. In the states, the primaries are all about winning the election and much less about ideology. The perception of legitimacy, charisma, and, most importantly: face time are king.
To a European whose political institutions and parties are established and voted for much more on the basis of ideology and issues, and whose party leaders are not voted on, but are appointed based on meritorious service and qualification, the "non-ideological" nature of American politics must seem rather counterintuitive. I'm not entirely sure that he intended any kind of offense, but, given language issues and his COMPLETELY different political cultural assumptions, such a 'unique' system may very well seem the "wrong way" to conduct an election.
Let's put it this way: you could have let the perceived insult go, taught him about US politics and come off as the nice guy rather than jumping on him for his curiousity. I really don't think that constituted much of an attack. The whole system seems rather counterintuitive to me, for crying out loud, and I live two minutes from the border! However, I have much more access to knowledge about American history and "what makes Americans tick" than does Jarulf, and so perhaps I don't find your "unique" systems quite so strange. That doesn't make them any less anamolous given the way that the majority of the rest of the democratic world conducts elections, and maybe this - and not a personal attack - was where he was coming from. At least that's the way I interpreted it...
To a European whose political institutions and parties are established and voted for much more on the basis of ideology and issues, and whose party leaders are not voted on, but are appointed based on meritorious service and qualification, the "non-ideological" nature of American politics must seem rather counterintuitive. I'm not entirely sure that he intended any kind of offense, but, given language issues and his COMPLETELY different political cultural assumptions, such a 'unique' system may very well seem the "wrong way" to conduct an election.
Let's put it this way: you could have let the perceived insult go, taught him about US politics and come off as the nice guy rather than jumping on him for his curiousity. I really don't think that constituted much of an attack. The whole system seems rather counterintuitive to me, for crying out loud, and I live two minutes from the border! However, I have much more access to knowledge about American history and "what makes Americans tick" than does Jarulf, and so perhaps I don't find your "unique" systems quite so strange. That doesn't make them any less anamolous given the way that the majority of the rest of the democratic world conducts elections, and maybe this - and not a personal attack - was where he was coming from. At least that's the way I interpreted it...
But whate'er I be,
Nor I, nor any man that is,
With nothing shall be pleased till he be eased
With being nothing.
William Shakespeare - Richard II
Nor I, nor any man that is,
With nothing shall be pleased till he be eased
With being nothing.
William Shakespeare - Richard II