Harvard has released a study in its own unique way of celebrating the Fourth of July with America. Harvard Kennedy School Assistant Professor David Yanagizawa-Drott and Bocconi University Assistant Professor Andreas Madestam argue that Fourth of July celebrations tend to turn people into Republicans and help advance the GOP in elections. I would differ. I think Harvard studies tend to push people toward conservative candidates.
The study suggests that Republicans benefit most from patriotic celebrations: “Fourth of July celebrations in the United States shape the nation’s political landscape by forming beliefs and increasing participation, primarily in favor of the Republican Party.” They go on to say that these celebrations dovetail with conservative causes and themes. They warn “there is a political congruence between the patriotism promoted on Fourth of July and the values associated with the Republican party. Fourth of July celebrations in Republican dominated counties may thus be more politically biased events that socialize children into Republicans.”
In fairness to these professors, they are simply giving the results of a survey that shows the influence on individuals in terms of their political views. Moreover, they suggest that Republicans do in fact celebrate the Fourth of July more rigorously than do Democrats.
I came from one of the most liberal families on Earth and we always celebrated the Fourth of July. We were taught it was a celebration of our rights and our success as a free and pluralistic nation. As a father, I go crazy on the Fourth of July and, over Leslie’s annual protestations, buy enough fireworks to take over a small nation.
I actually would have been more interested in the difference not in how we celebrate the Fourth of July but why we celebrate the Fourth of July. I often talk to the kids about the struggle for liberty from free speech to free exercise. Others seem to celebrate America’s might and dominance. I would have been more intrigued by a survey on how people view the holiday.
There is a danger that some may take the study as a reason not to participate in patriotic celebrations after reading lines like “There is no evidence of an increased likelihood of identifying as a Democrat, indicating that Fourth of July shifts preferences to the right rather than increasing political polarization.”
That is only true if citizens allow the Fourth of July to be associated with Republican values. There can be a self-fulfilling prophesy in such studies if liberals view these celebrations with greater suspicion. I am appalled by the decision this year in Chicago to cancel the Fourth of July fireworks in Chicago to save money. This is the one holiday that unites us all — a celebration of not just our history but our pluralism and values. I grew up going to the fireworks every year on the beach with my family. We joined thousands of Chicagoans of different races and religions and backgrounds. It summed up for me what is it to be a citizen. I am ashamed of my home city in its decision to cancel the fireworks. Any Chicagoans are welcomed to join the Turley clan in McLean for a true patriotic pyrotechnic extravaganza.
John Adams, no conservative, once stated “I believe that it will be celebrated by succeeding generations as the great anniversary festival,” he wrote his wife, Abigail. “It ought to be celebrated by pomp and parade, with shows, games, sports, guns, bells, bonfires, and illuminations from one end of this continent to the other…”
From one end of this continent to the other . . . even on Harvard yard.
Source: USNews
I wasn’t talking about this blog. Perhaps you might read my posts more carefully?
Mr. Bertoni,
You must not read this blog very often, because most of the regulars here agreed that the military activities in Libya were wrong and were an abuse of presidential power. That being said, let’s compare notes. How many United States and/or NATO servicemen or women have died in the Libya conflict? Zero. How many sservice men and women gave the ultimate sacrifice in Iraq? 3-4000 depending on whose count you use. You may want to check your history on the Vietnam war. Start by reading the Pentagon Papers and you will see who started our involvement in that debacle. We were paying over half of the bill for the French when they fell at Dien Bien Phu in 1954. Eisenhower sent “advisors” there and Kennedy did as well and Johnson upped the numbers significantly. Of course, Nixon then ran on a Peace platform and won, but didn’t pull out of Vietnam. Then he ran a second time on a peace platform and won again. And who was the President to bombed and invaded Cambodia during the Vietnam War? That’s right, it was Tricky Dick.
By the way, Democrats and Liberals are just as patriotic as Teapublicans and most of us do take showers.
David,
“If you’d read my previous posts, they are directed to the vast, unwashed ocean of leftists who behave in this fashion. ”
You sound like you have an objective unbiased opinion on the matter.
David,
You’re right. No Criticism of our involvement in Libya here.
http://www.google.com/search?q=Libya+Jonathan+site%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fjonathanturley.org&hl=en&biw=1024&bih=588&num=10&lr=&ft=i&cr=&safe=images&tbs=
But, setting aside your caricature…
Why would criticizing foriegn policy decisions be “anti-American” but criticizing internal policies isn’t?
I’m not talking about Professor Turley. If you’d read my previous posts, they are directed to the vast, unwashed ocean of leftists who behave in this fashion. Professor Turley’s voice of reason is lost for many (if not most) of them.
“The[y] attack ‘lies’ that led us into Iraq, but remain silent with regard to “lies” that led us into Libya. They rail against ‘water-boarding,’ yet say nothing about what appears to be a targeted assassination of an unarmed man fulfilled execution-style in front of at least one of his children.”
Have you ever actually read this blog?
http://jonathanturley.org/2011/06/15/members-of-congress-challenge-libyan-war-in-federal-court/
http://jonathanturley.org/2011/03/28/obama-aide-we-dont-make-decisions-based-on-consistency-or-precedent/
@Mike Spindell said:
“Perhaps two unnecessary wars, gratuitous worldwide interventions and the legacy of the Viet Nam debacle have contributed to the “shrillness” of some
people. It is hard to be supportive of actions inimical to our Constitution and to our founding principles. That is true patriotism, not the jingoistic nonsense spewed in support of furthering corporate interests by creating America as the new Rome. Google PNAC 1998.”
It’s still shrill, and it’s mostly irrational. I say it’s irrational because most on the left engage in rather obvious hypocrisy and cognitive dissonance in these matters. The attack “lies” that led us into Iraq, but remain silent with regard to “lies” that led us into Libya. They rail against “water-boarding,” yet say nothing about what appears to be a targeted assassination of an unarmed man fulfilled execution-style in front of at least one of his children. When weighing the “legitimacy” of war, they discount entirely far worse and tyrannical activities of the countries we attack — unless those countries are attacked under the command of Democrats. The “jingoistic” nonsense has nothing to do with “corporate interests” (which is just an Orwellian catch-phrase empty of content and reason), but more to do with economic and geo-political interests that coalesce in military operations we undertake. Just examine the current administration’s bizarre attempt to evade congressional oversight in its war against Libya. Why? Are they captive to “corporate interests”? This entire demonization of the “corporate” as opposed to the “individual” is bizarre and ignorant, yet it is mouthed by ostensibly well-educated people who speak about it in much the same way religious zealots rail against homosexuals.
@mespo — how about directing your “juices” at your Palin blow-up doll, failing that direct them at forming coherent arguments. You seem to have some problems forming coherent arguments and also spewing insults simultaneously. Shoot for the former or your Palin doll (aim for the holes where the eyes used to be.)
mespo,
“Of course you’re correct but our adversarial juices get going and it’s hard to stop. I am renewing my vow to stop feeding trolls in the interest of civility, but I may need a 12 step program.”
LOL!
🙂
Gyges:
You sure did.
MIke S:
Of course you’re correct but our adversarial juices get going and it’s hard to stop. I am renewing my vow to stop feeding trolls in the interest of civility, but I may need a 12 step program.
Professor Turley,
Take heart! The fireworks at the Pier were pretty damn good! I think the 80,000 people there agreed. It was a beautiful night and my 7 year old grandson was enthralled. I gave him the “Republican” afterwards and he passed! He promises not to be a Wall Street Banker and he thinks revenues should be raised.
@Mike Spindell — good job calling for civility in a completely uncivil way as possible. That should get results.
I thought the comment was clear, Elaine. Do you want specifics?
Not absolving myself of equal responsibility in this I’m beginning to come around to FFLEO’s request for civility on the part of those who enjoy posting here. I really think it’s time to simply ignore the obvious trolls, rather
than responding to them. Although troll baiting is fun, it truly is like shooting fish in a barrel and unlike fish they never die just ungraciously fade away.
Gyges,
Not sure why kderosa has an “Elaine” fixation. Maybe you can figure it out for me.
kderosa said:
“As far as my comments to Elaine go, where is the insult? My statement is a true depiction of what Elaine professed to believe in another comment thread. I am merely pointing out to her how her opinion in that thread is divergent with her opinion in this thread, demonstrating her hypocrisy among other things.”
Not a lot of specifics pointed out in that comment.
You mistake trying to censor you with making you look like a fool and the demonstrated liar that you are.
@Gyges
With respect to the “They started it” statement. Go back to the record and you’ll see that I maintained decorum for quite some time after the insults started flying. It was childish to stoop to their level, I agree. It was far more childish for the regulars to engage in that behavior in the first place. Though you appear to only be pointing fingers at me, presumably because you diasgree with my opinions, and have said nothing about the behavior of the regulars (who started the trolling by engaging in insults design to provoke a personal response which they were successful at), including your own behavior. You do realize you are being hypocritcal, don’t you?
As far as my comments to Elaine go, where is the insult? My statement is a true depiction of what Elaine professed to believe in another comment thread. I am merely pointing out to her how her opinion in that thread is divergent with her opinion in this thread, demonstrating her hypocrisy among other things. Elaine has engaged in plenty of name calling and insults and I have failed to see you call her out on any of them. And, yes, it is important that she started it and continued unabated.
If you were more even-handed in your recriminations and didn’t engage in the same sort of behavior (Censorship is not someone telling you you’re acting like a jackass.) you’d be taken more seriously.
And, of course you are trying to censor me, you just don’t have the power to do it formally so you using more indirect techniques.
“since the anti-American rhetoric on the left has become increasingly shrill over the last 10 years.”
David,
Perhaps two unnecessary wars, gratuitous worldwide interventions and the legacy of the Viet Nam debacle have contributed to the “shrillness” of some
people. It is hard to be supportive of actions inimical to our Constitution and to our founding principles. That is true patriotism, not the jingoistic nonsense spewed in support of furthering corporate interests by creating America as the new Rome. Google PNAC 1998.
That’s right Mespo, that’s nothing compared to the millions of Iraqis killed from Uncle Sam’s 2 predatory wars plus a decade of sanctions against them.
Like I said, Desert Storm and Panama definitely are NOT considered “major” wars of the 20th century so my original statement stands needing no correction: Democrats prosecuted every major war in the 20th century. And all the wars would be unthinkable without their support, enabling and complicity. Yet progressive minded people still cast votes for them. How insane. What a shame.
I must admit that except for the fireworks, I’ve always found mass celebrations of the Fourth jingoistic, insincere and hokey. Yet I do love America and wouldn’t want to live anywhere else, despite its’ many flaws. I find this true when I see events where veterans are celebrated because I think them hypocritical. Even in just wars, like WWII, many were sacrificed through the stupidity or callousness of their superiors, though in the end their deaths and maiming were justified. After WWII, unlike other American Wars, our troops were honored materially and with reverence for their sacrifice.
This has not been true in most other wars, for instance the Veteran’s riots after WWI. The false piety and respect we pretend to pay to our veterans is grounded in hypocrisy. Most other wars have been indeed “rackets” for a few to garner wealth. The tragic sacrifices of our troops, driven by propaganda, equated to unneeded loss.
The mass celebrations of our country’s founding have been commercialized and homogenized into commercial profit centers. The “Macy’s” 4th Fireworks display, the “Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade, the generic “Fourth of July Sales Blowout!” have all contributed to turning a solemn ritual of remembrance into trite excuses for fun and profit. This dovetails with the current “Faux” Conservative movement and its’ control of the Republican Party. Everything that demands a ritual of solemnity and a celebration of human commonality, becomes an excuse to sell something.
Since hypocrisy is a mainstay of that movement, perhaps there is some truth to the study.
My preferences for celebrating the Fourth is backyard barbecues, bringing together friends and family to celebrate their bonds and perhaps shoot off some cool rockets. In the feeling of community that emotionally engenders, I can see what American life is all about.
When one talks of Democrats starting all wars, one ignores the reality of history. Most American wars have been started with bi-partisan approval.
This bi-partisanship representing a unity of belligerence on the part of a self-interested elite group of foreign policy insiders. Think “Cold War.” Our
entrenched Foreign Policy Establishment (Military/Industrial Complex?) has used bi-partisanship to stifle opposition and force support for many of these misadventures. One of my great disappointments with our current President, has been his reliance of bi-partisanship as a favored goal, rather than understanding that it is a process negative to our democracy. In using
bi-partisanship we preclude the validity of differing viewpoints, some of which may well have important information to add to a discussion of a particular policy.