All Talk, All Action
"He's all talk."
"All talk, no action."
"He can talk the talk, but can he walk the walk?"
These are just a few cliches that condemn words as, well, just words. All came to mind as I watched the inauguration this morning, Battle Hymn of the Republic and all. I found myself debating the value of these speeches and benedictions, and not just because I have issues with references to God's blessings. Inspirational? Perhaps, to some, but that is dangerous territory, calling one's nation a blessed populace (although we are blessed, but not in the chosen-people sense; we are blessed with relative prosperity and great fortune compared to so many other countries that struggle to get by with a fraction of what we consume).
Ultimately, it is meaningless to talk about having faith in our system of government or in God without concrete action. Faith may move mountains, but it doesn't fill potholes or solve the problem of economic inequalities.
More to the point, how much good do speeches do when we find ourselves mired in politically polarized debates, when corporations are able to influence the outcome of elections with unlimited cash?
Well, we can't fix the myriad problems with our democracy without talking about them. Words are crucial to a democracy, which relies on the exchange of ideas, conversations to shape policy and choices. As I writer, I choose to hope that words can bridge differences and help us select the right action.
Words have shifting meaning. I can choose to be annoyed by religious references that I find irritating or even dangerous, or I can accept it as a method of coalescing an idealistic view of the world, which can be used to inspire, as long as it doesn't lead to dogma.
I read an article in the paper this week that gave me a good deal of comfort: MoveOn and the Tea Party can be civil. If they can sit down and have a conversation, why can't we all? Democracy and the world we live in are interesting topics; stressful, yes, but interesting. Let's talk about it.
"All talk, no action."
"He can talk the talk, but can he walk the walk?"
These are just a few cliches that condemn words as, well, just words. All came to mind as I watched the inauguration this morning, Battle Hymn of the Republic and all. I found myself debating the value of these speeches and benedictions, and not just because I have issues with references to God's blessings. Inspirational? Perhaps, to some, but that is dangerous territory, calling one's nation a blessed populace (although we are blessed, but not in the chosen-people sense; we are blessed with relative prosperity and great fortune compared to so many other countries that struggle to get by with a fraction of what we consume).
Ultimately, it is meaningless to talk about having faith in our system of government or in God without concrete action. Faith may move mountains, but it doesn't fill potholes or solve the problem of economic inequalities.
More to the point, how much good do speeches do when we find ourselves mired in politically polarized debates, when corporations are able to influence the outcome of elections with unlimited cash?
Well, we can't fix the myriad problems with our democracy without talking about them. Words are crucial to a democracy, which relies on the exchange of ideas, conversations to shape policy and choices. As I writer, I choose to hope that words can bridge differences and help us select the right action.
Words have shifting meaning. I can choose to be annoyed by religious references that I find irritating or even dangerous, or I can accept it as a method of coalescing an idealistic view of the world, which can be used to inspire, as long as it doesn't lead to dogma.
I read an article in the paper this week that gave me a good deal of comfort: MoveOn and the Tea Party can be civil. If they can sit down and have a conversation, why can't we all? Democracy and the world we live in are interesting topics; stressful, yes, but interesting. Let's talk about it.
posted by Devin at 11:29 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home