| |
When we say there's no such thing as casual conversation with Watson Fellow David Ragsdale and Freeman Fellow Whitney Walker, we're only half-kidding. Bright, determined, and engagingly opinionated, confronting either of these classic CMCers on their worldviews should be done with extreme caution; in other words, challengers may want to carry a dictionary.
CMC: What do you think about modern society in the year 2001?
David Ragsdale '01: Three things have forever changed society: (1) the invention of the birth control pill. Sex is now for pleasure, and the consequences of sex are done away with. (2) Increase in technology leads to the breakdown of community, and (3) the ethic of individualism and hedonism pervades the institutions that support culture: art, architecture, academia, publishing, even churches, to a large extent.
CMC: Which is what your thesis is about?
Ragsdale: Yes. What you have is these three things aren't new things, they've been happening since the Enlightenment-the project of trying to justify some sort of external morality, not based on God or natural order but on reason. They were unable to do that, because reason wasn't strong enough to stand up to people like Nietzsche, who said you're not using reason, you're just using your willpower. And yet, since the Enlightenment destroyed religion, religion couldn't stand up to it. So now you have these modern ideas of radical individualism and radical egalitarianism. And the only institution that had been completely against modernism for centuries-that said we don't seek to be modern-was the Catholic Church. The church still had a very hierarchical theology based on the bible and natural law-the popes would write tracts against modernism as late as the early 20th century.
CMC: So the Catholic Church was the only establishment to rail against modernism?
Ragsdale: The only one large enough to create a culture that wasn't modern-if you didn't like everything in the popular language of the day, if you didn't like the commercial utility of it-you could visit a monastery or go to church. But starting with John 23, the church decided the best way to comment on the modern world was to become part of the modern world-to open the windows and let the sunshine of modernity seep through the church and change it. So they changed not doctrines, but the external forms, like mass in English, the priest facing the people rather than the altar-the mass itself was changed, not just translated, but simplified. And now it was more about fellowship as opposed to sacrifice.
CMC: Is there anything that's tried to take the place of the anti-modern Catholic Church?
Ragsdale: No. Everything tried to be up-to-date and modern and "hip." We think we all have these images of wanting to rebel-"We're youth! We want to rebel! We're going to wear casual everything and not buy into formal structures." But if you look around, everything is casual-look at Mike Jeffries. He doesn't even wear a belt, let alone a suit. So the way for youth to rebel is to wear ties when their parents refuse to, to buy into differences in structure and hierarchy, and to reject the casual hipness. There's nothing that makes me cringe more than a 50-year-old trying to be hip, wearing a hat backwards and board shorts. It makes me want to put on a suit.
CMC: Let's talk about the increase in technology-why is that bad?
Ragsdale: Because you don't have to rely on community to give you the things you need. You leave home in the morning, drive in your own car to your own office-communication is outmoded. It all leads to seclusion.
CMC: Is there a reason why the natural direction of technology is in that direction?
Ragsdale: I don't wish I lived in the last century. I was born three months early, so I benefited from technology-an incubator. I like modern hygiene. I like modern life expectancy rates. But I think technology may be providing too much for people in terms of the more entertainment aspects-it gets a little too easy. One interpretation says the invention of the Walkman or the personal stereo is what led to this breakdown, because before, the family would have one stereo and the parents could listen to the music kids were listening to, and now everyone listens to their own music.
CMC: What do you think of the state of the world right now? Are things getting better or worse?
Whitney Walker '01: I don't know. At times I'm very excited, at times I'm not. To hear that Sweden is able to implement policies of diversity into their infrastructure and government-their whole culture is based around this concept of diversity. That's great. But at the same time, to hear about the Taliban in Afghanistan-there's a sense of helplessness that goes along with that.
CMC: What do you think are the major problems facing the world?
Walker: I think that the women have so much potential for the world, and countries don't realize that. It's small organizations that are going out and actually trying to change that. In Bangladesh there is an organization that gives loans of $25 to women-$25!-to start their own businesses. And the default rate on these loans is so low. It's been proven that women are better at managing those loans and starting those businesses because there is more at stake…
CMC: So, would you say that one of the major problems of the world is the subjugation of women globally, due to the historical male power structure?
Walker: All of those words are such buzzwords that really turn people off. I wouldn't call it subjugation, but the paradigm is such that women are not included-it doesn't even enter the consciousness when people are talking about economic growth or industrialization. The image of women-across history-is that women show their patriotism and their nationalism through being mothers, and so it's hard to shift that and look at the potential that women have, aside from being mothers.
CMC: Okay, but whether or not you like those words, you believe there is an under-use of the global population of women-what do you think is the best way to solve that-what would you do?
Walker: Education is the most basic.
CMC: Education of women or education of the whole population about women?
Walker: I mean equal education. And that doesn't happen.
CMC: What you said about women showing their patriotism by being mothers-why do you think that is?
Walker: When there is conflict in society-anything that disrupts what is normal-over time people seek a return to stability. And constantly the way they do that is by returning to what they know as basic. As a consequence they reinforce motherhood, and restate gender differences. For example, in the French revolution, the concept of Republican motherhood is what ended the revolution. Even feminists who were fighting for rights to citizenship ended up saying "women can serve as citizens… in the home. We don't have to call them citizens." And in World War One, motherhood was so central to Britain and France as they were facing invasion, they said, "we need to defend our mothers. Our mothers will help us through."
CMC: So you could almost say that any sort of conservative or reactionary movement is going to be a step back for women… that any stabilizing movement will be a step back for women.
Walker: I suppose.
CMC: What is feminism?
Walker: The textbook response is "the social, political, and economic equality of the sexes," but I think it's more than that. I think it incorporates issues of sexuality and class and age and race. My feminism is unique to me.
CMC: So you would agree to the statement that one of the main problems with society today is the economic, social, and political inequality of the sexes …
Walker: That's the PRIMARY problem! There are class and race factors in there… but I think that if people work towards that, that issues of race and sexuality will be muted.
CMC: Equality between the sexes will lead to parity across sexuality and race lines?
Walker: I think so.
CMC: Okay, so if the primary problem with society today is the economic, social, and political inequality of the sexes, and if there is one way to solve that problem, it's education?
Walker: To begin with...
CMC: What else do we need? Across the world, you have governments that are worded in such a way that women are written out. How do you change that? You mentioned smaller grassroots projects…
Walker: I think there is something to be said for setting goals and making an honest effort to reach them. In Sweden, they shot for half of the elected positions to be held by women by 2000… and they reached it! That takes honest effort, not just empty language. There are so many different things factored into that. Education is the basic place to start, and I think in government once women are included in the process, that language will change as well. That's why I think racial inequalities will change as well. Since women have been designated as the "other," they are aware of other "others" being left out.
|
David Ragsdale '01 and Whitney Walker '01
Sound bites:
Ragsdale - The primary problem with the world today is the loss of tradition, ritual and formality, which have been leveled by twin forces of radical individualism and radical egalitarianism. The restoration of the tridentine mass will lead to a more holistic, integral and sustainable culture.
Walker - The primary problem with the world today is the economic, political, and social inequality of the sexes. If we can change this through widespread governmental reform and local independent projects it will pave the way for gender, racial and class parity.
|
