Well, I was being proscriptive, not descriptive. I do think politicians should restrict themselves to talking about serious things.Morley wrote: ↑Mon Apr 03, 2023 9:08 pmExcept that everything in society has something to do with law and finance, from zoning requirements to who gets taxed. Public funding of universities and public health research ensured that abortion, Wuhan labs, and gender pronouns would be political.
You're kidding yourself to think that you can (or even should) cordon off politics. As you know, the fact that we even have disciplines such Spanish, Near East Studies, or Classics taught in universities is, and always has been, a political statement.
Your point is taken to some extent, but we don't need everybody's input on everything. I believe data and expertise should rule the day in terms of lawmaking, but I also realize that many issues are complicated and certain laws are dependent on how those issues play out.
I guess what I'm really saying is that I don't think political discourse is as serious as it used to be. When I was young, everything seemed serious and complicated. As I've aged, I not only got to the point where I understood what was going on, I started to realize it was dumber and more straightforward than I'd ever imagined. These days, it's all political theater, and it exposes us Americans as easily distracted peons. The things people argue over today largely seem insane to argue over, and a huge distraction so that politicians never have to actually do anything substantive for the American people. They motivate voters with agitation, not promise. When politicians are getting into that game by default and seem no smarter than the average dude in a bar arguing about it, well... it's sickening.