|
Saturday, January 03, 2004
The most important man in the worldThis week's Economist writes that America's 2004 election "is crucial -- and not just because it will choose the most important man in the world."
Pfui. In the last few years I've noticed a general and growing disease that seems to put politics above any other human endeavor; this blog is not immune; but I always thought The Economist, for a news outlet, had maintained a genteel sense of balance. So it's a weird slip. The U.S., true enough, has grown so powerful that our president now outranks not just the American senate but also any leader in the EU or Russia. Got that. Fine. But I always thought of our president as the country's most important bureaucrat, maybe our most important public servant. If all of a sudden we're voting for "world's most important man," then the two-party system has been -- how can I put this politely? -- a catastrophic fucking failure.
posted by Michael Scott Moore |
2:23 AM
| 
