We're no where near an all time record level. This nation started as a nation of skeptics and as reading about the Whiskey Rebellion shows, it was a nation of skeptics as soon as the Federal government lifted a finger to do anything other than enforce the tariffs at ports and provide enough of a Navy to keep the British off our necks.
It wasn't until the 60s when television replaced newspapers as the primary source of information for most people, especially younger people, that Americans were lulled into the sort of trance that most loyal democrats are still in.
Increasing skepticism isn't the problem, not even a problem. The amazing lack of skepticism is the problem
_Great_ post.
In the late 1700s Americans knew how to be _really_ nasty to politicians and those on the other side of issues.
Then there was that Revolutionary War thingy which looked a lot like a Civil War in a lot of places. :-)
Healthy skepticism is always appropriate.
“... it was a nation of skeptics as soon as the Federal government lifted a finger to do anything other than enforce the tariffs at ports and provide enough of a Navy to keep the British off our necks.
It wasn’t until the 60s when television replaced newspapers as the primary source of information for most people, especially younger people,... The amazing lack of skepticism is the problem.” [Rashputin, post 7]
Not a bad read on what changed. The arrival of TV heralded the change from what was a print-based culture to an image-based culture. At this late date, we are far down that road. The briefiest self-aware glance at TV and magazine advertisements will give it away: ever the longer the more, there is no deliberately stated “message” - not even one so simple as “Buy this!” No written nor spoken words, save the name of the product, or a pic of it (if it’s easily identified, like an automobile or a watch, or a bottle of shampoo with a big bold brand name logo).
The thumbnail portrait of the US Navy is wrong though. Or possibly 120 years too early. The USA did not win the War of Independence. Rather, we got lucky: in 1775-1783, other Euro powers eventually got involved; Imperial Britain found that hanging onto its American colonies was less of a priority.
A similar sequence of events occurred in 1812-1815, though the USA’s plight was more self-induced. Heavily committed to the defeat of Napoleonic France, the British could not spare the forces to deal a decisive blow.
US Naval exploits against the Royal Navy were vital in reviving American morale and cohesion, but barely rated as pinpricks, in the overall strategic picture.
If we Americans of the latter day are inclined to thank anyone, we ought to thank the Royal Navy. During much of the 18th century and all of the 19th century it was British maritime dominance that enabled a truly American nation to germinate, take root, and grow. Trade flourished because the Royal Navy suppressed piracy, slave trading, and hostile powers. The British Empire embraced free trade - imperfectly at first, but more fully as time passed. But its role in keeping sealanes open benefitted the USA and all other trading nations.
We are becoming a nation of skeptics, and it’s at an all-time level.”It wasn't until the 60s when television replaced newspapers as the primary source of information for most people, especially younger people, that Americans were lulled into the sort of trance that most loyal democrats are still in.
IMHO the roots of the problem go back a lot further than that. All the way back to the telegraph, in fact. Morse demo’ed the Baltimore-Washington telegraph in 1844, and the foundation of the Associated Press began before 1850. And there are of course other wire services - but “competitive or not,” wire services always tend to homogenize journalism.Increasing skepticism isn't the problem, not even a problem. The amazing lack of skepticism is the problem.People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices. - Adam Smith, Wealth of Nations (1776)Plainly, the AP “wire” is a virtual meeting of all major journalism outlets - one which does not end at all, let alone ending before generating “a conspiracy against the public.”
The natural disposition is always to believe. It is acquired wisdom and experience only that teach incredulity, and they very seldom teach it enough. The wisest and most cautious of us all frequently gives credit to stories which he himself is afterwards both ashamed and astonished that he could possibly think of believing.Here Adam Smith not only asserts your thesis that skepticism is in short supply, he tells us what journalists’ motives are - and thus what “a conspiracy against the public” by journalists would promote. See my tagline . . .The man whom we believe is necessarily, in the things concerning which we believe him, our leader and director, and we look up to him with a certain degree of esteem and respect. But as from admiring other people we come to wish to be admired ourselves; so from being led and directed by other people we learn to wish to become ourselves leaders and directors . . .
The desire of being believed, the desire of persuading, of leading and directing other people, seems to be one of the strongest of all our natural desires. - Adam Smith, Theory of Moral Sentiments (1759)