Maybe. Maybe not. Either way there's a particular scene that's starting to bug me.
It's the "smart" crowd. Those (mostly) young people who believe they are progressive and evolved enough that their opinions on legislation and the world make them inherently and objectively correct. That because they subscribe to a set of ethics that is upheld by a certain class with celebrity and marked by its "free-thinking" ways they are automatically justified and validated and right. They have become the intelligensia and anyone who is not with them is ignorant and just plain wrong.
These people don't feel the need to support their life constructs. They refuse to have a conversation or discussion, because they're right. And that's that.
Today is the day that the California Supreme Court upheld the Proposition 8 ban on same-sex marriage. Regardless of your ethical beliefs, the point here is not discrimination. The point here is democracy working as it should. The majority voted, the majority rules -- as with our current president. The majority voted for him, the majority ruled. Those that voted the other way do not have the opportunity to repeal that vote and send it back to the Supreme Court for another ruling. Yet at the state level people will whine and complain and make appeals. And often times get their way.
Not today though. The CA Supreme Court has really upheld American democracy.
But what really gets me, again, are the people I know who are so convinced their ethics structure is correct that they demonize anyone with an alternate view. They have been fed media and regurgitate media. They buy into the fabricated world that everyone is agreed and has reached consensus, but don't do research for themselves.
There was a great "Simon Says" story on NPR just after that Miss California "fiasco" entitled The Difference Between Listening and Hearing:
Donald Trump suggested this week that people who ridicule Carrie Prejean for opposing gay marriage should remember that she has the same position as President Obama. Yet many people who like and admire the president see him as friendly to same-sex marriage. Ms. Prejean has been mocked as some kind of beach-blonde California airhead, or worse, a bigot.
Scott Simon gives a terribly insightful narrative concerning how the "smart people" interact with the world. Now, to generalise, many of these individuals are strong Obama supporters--many to the point of fanboy/girl status--but they can't allow themselves to believe he has a different view from them. They are validated by having an "intelligent" president in office (totally different topic, but I'd argue that Bush was also intelligent--as was Bill Clinton, to be fair--and that an unwillingness to associate with anything considered fashionably taboo keeps them from admitting it), and there is absolutely no way he can not support same-sex marriage. Shock. Scandal. True.
Also from Simon:
I play this little exercise this week because it may show how people — especially intelligent people — hear what they want to. They like the president, and know he's smart. So they assume he agrees with them, even when he says otherwise. People who are sure they would never slur someone because of religion or race will belittle a 22-year-old because she's a beauty queen and cannot possibly hold the same opinion as someone they admire. It makes it a bit harder, but more important, to do real journalism and sometimes tell an audience, "We know what you think you know. But listen to this."
It's time to grow up and actually pay attention to what's going on beyond the hype and marketing. I have not yet resigned myself to the inevitability of marketing ruling my life. Because it doesn't and won't. I will remain a critical thinker and strongly wish others--particularly the people I consider friends--would do the same.
Sometimes what you know you don't really know at all. And never have. Question yourself and question the media.