Eyes Wide Shut

The problem of the American public's self-censorship is a devilish, serious one. Commentator Michael Massing's essay addresses it from the perspective of American soldiers who served in Iraq. They graphically vent their frustration at the absence of realistic coverage of war by American media outlets.
But this refusal by media who take their cues from public attitudes to depict the ugly truth of war, is but a piece of a larger, essential problem--the public's unwillingness to demand that their political elite hold certain positions, foreign and domestic, that are truly reflective of our democratic ideals and traditions.
In Pakistan, for example, George Bush's refusal to link reform with aid, evidenced here, has allowed Pervez Musharraf to suspend that country's constitution. The President prefers authoritarianism over reform, so great is his distrust in the people of Pakistan.
It's unlikely there will be much of an outcry from Republicans. Why? A recent analysis by the Daily Telegraph ranked the most popular conservatives and liberals in America. Reader responses to the rankings complained that Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity were ranked too low. When citizens refuse to leave their carefully constructed idealogical worlds and refuse entry to other, contrary viewpoints, all of us are the poorer for it.
So what to do? Is there a candidate on the horizon who would actually state--in policy rather than rhetorical terms alone--a platform constructed on democratic ideals? Unfortunately, the current non-stop debates have revealed little difference among candidates; much of their time is spent working up a mighty sweat to show themselves tougher than the other on matters such as Iran.
As long as this remains the case we cannot expect the political elite to articulate democratic policy positions. The public must--must--demand during this campaign season that candidates advocate fundamentally democratic policies, at home and abroad.