Imagine there’s no religion, it’s easy for The New York Times to do — even in a Christmas Day editorial that somehow forgets that Christmas is about Christ’s birth. In fact, the NYT decided that this Christmas was its opportunity to wallow in worse-than-ever sentiments and to bemoan that this year’s Christmas isn’t as good as it used to be. Oh, they tried to dress it up a bit by saying it is great to have a Christmas that gets us back to basics and also by slipping in some global warming clap trap, but it is still a lament that we all have it so darn bad these days.
The Christmas Day editorial starts off surmising that “you may be wondering about the carbon equation of a Christmas tree,” though it is a bit amusing to see them make such a silly assumption. I’d rather bet that even most environuts weren’t thinking about their Christmas carbon footprint when they awoke that morning! But, not the NYT. They are all worried that those old Christmas lights are going to cause the end of the planet as we know it!
Then the Times lapses into its first lament on these horrible days in which we live.
This may be the Christmas when you wonder, or are forced to find out, just how much of the material Christmas you can leave behind.
It may be the one that redefines Christmas entirely — for better or worse.
Oh, the gnashing of teeth and rending of clothes. It’s rotten out there, dontcha know? Let’s wallow in how tough America has it and lament that things just aren’t so good these days. Worst ever. The pits.
Let’s not make the season bright. That would be too traditional for the Times.
Of course, to accept the Times’ lament we’d have to ignore that for the most part Americans have it better in 2008 than they’ve ever had it in their lives. The things we buy, both necessities and otherwise, are cheaper, taking up less of our daily income than ever before. While prices seem higher, so is our average income. Durable goods are cheaper and often last longer and are easier to replace. Cars need repairs less than before (even though that seems hard to believe). And, even in the midst of a growing economic downturn, we are still employed at a pretty high rate — remembering that the Great Depression saw unemployment rates often above the 20th percentile range. (Also, remember that women and blacks weren’t counted in Great Depression era unemployment numbers, so that number was much higher in reality.)
Anyway, the point is we are NOT in the worst of times. In fact, life in America is pretty darn good for the largest number of its citizens.
Then, The Times waxes nostalgic over Christmases past.
If you look back at the photos of Christmas 50 years ago — not that long a time, really — you can see what a simple place it once was. What you wanted for Christmas was a very short list of possibilities, and what you got was usually the single most possible thing on the list, plus a few of the articles your mother thought you needed. The intent was the same as it is now, more or less, but the means were so much fewer.
The Times seem only vaguely aware that, fifty years ago, this whole world was a lot different. Americans did with less back then because there was less to have! Less medicine, less educational opportunities, less entertainment, less of everything we now take for granted. It wasn’t that Americans were austere out of conscious choice, it was that the plenty we now take for granted did not exist. And even at that rate we had it thousands of times better than peoples of other nations in the 1950s. So, even by comparison then we had it great.
The Times’ economic focus is off base, for sure.
From there the Times goes on to use the “simple place” the USA “once was” to say that today’s tough times will reintroduce “a new and simpler Christmas” like the olden days of fifty years ago. Oh, it’s the end of everything according to the Times. America is done. Talk about a lack of faith in our country!
Lastly the Times introduces us to some maudlin sentiment infused with prosaic philosophizing. Christmas, you see, “won’t save us,” the Times says. We cannot rely on Christmas shopping to save our economy it gravely warns. “The shopping we do this season,” won’t, the Times says, “keep the economy afloat or give us the buoyancy we need for the coming year.”
And then the pop philosophizing…
But, really, Christmas needs no saving. It does not exist apart from what we make of it. And, on its own, it cannot save us, though it contains the gestures of generosity and thankfulness that are halfway to being a better person, a richer community. Christmas is all the better for being a simple place, nothing more, perhaps, than two red cardinals, male and female, against the backdrop of a snowy field. They are there every day. The only difference is that today it feels like Christmas.
First of all, ANY human endeavor is “what we make of it.” Even the most shallow among us know that life is what you make of it. It is no deep philosophical point to state the plainly obvious. But, this entire paragraph of pop philosophy is neither eloquent, nor particularly cogent. I mean, how are cardinals there in a “snowy field” every day? Is there snow every day? Do cardinals stick around with us 365 days a year? The metaphor — what ever it was supposed to be — falls flat.
And, lastly, it cannot escape notice that, as I hinted above, The New York Times does not once mention the person for whom this day was named. Jesus Christ makes no showing at all in the Times piece. Why does Christmas have those “gestures of generosity and thankfulness,” anyway? The Times does not mention why. It is, of course, because of the generosity and thankfulness taught us by Jesus Christ whose birthday we celebrate on December 25th.
It certainly wasn’t for the holiday that Christmas overtook, Saturnalia. That day was a day of debauchery, mean-spirited pranks, drinking and fist fights. It was not the day of peace and love that is Christ’s birthday celebration.
So, for The New York Times, Christmas is not a day to celebrate the birth of Christ. It is a day to calculate a carbon footprint, a day to bemoan how far America has fallen, and a day to contemplate phony sentimentality devoid of its religious moorings.
Yeah. Merry Christmas, New York Times. Merry Christmas, indeed.
Be sure and Visit my Home blog Publius’ Forum. It’s what’s happening NOW!
Steve Maley
Neil Stevens
What's funny is that the NYT looks back upon the 30s
Mike gamecock DeVine (Diary) Friday, December 26th at 10:54AM EST (link)as the best of times, i.e. when so many were dependant on FDR.
Mike DeVine’s Examiner.com, Charlotte Observer and The Minority Report columns
“One man with courage makes a majority.” – Andrew Jackson
Very good.
Alberta (Diary) Friday, December 26th at 12:39PM EST (link)The global warming thing had to be a joke right? The NYT was putting that in to make me laugh, right? Oh, they were serious. Wow.
If Im to understand this, the NYT laments how we are all poor and then looks back longingly on a time when we, ah, we were all poor. Right. And that cardinal metaphor? The english language should call the cops on the author for assault and battery. No author on the editorial you say? Curious.
Sir, my concern is not whether God is on our side; my greatest concern is to be on God’s side, for God is always right.
Abraham Lincoln
No it's not a joke.
chemjeff (Diary) Friday, December 26th at 4:18PM EST (link)Have you ever had a serious conversation with these elitist latte liberals? They do worry about things like the carbon footprint of their pets.
That stupid
Warner Todd Huston (Diary) Friday, December 26th at 5:41PM EST (link)That stupid cardinal part really had me laughing at the pretentiousness, too. Pretentious AND ineffective at the same time.
———-
Be sure and Visit my Home blog Publius’ Forum. It’s what’s happening NOW!
The good news about the NYT
hunter (Diary) Friday, December 26th at 2:56PM EST (link)Is that as their business collpases, along with the quality of their news and editorial practices, their carbon footprint will soon be reduced to near zero.
Afterall, a newspaper that goes out of business needs to kill no trees.
hunter
Bah. (NYT) Humbug.
Steve Maley (Diary) Friday, December 26th at 2:56PM EST (link)“…two red cardinals, male and female, against the backdrop of a snowy field”
The female cardinal is not red, but brown. Check it out:
The blogger formerly known as ‘Vladimir’.
How soon before some readers will accuse the NYT of being heterosexist
civil truth (Diary) Friday, December 26th at 4:42PM EST (link)Their PC editor must have fallen asleep momentarily, I think. I mean the editorial goes to explicit lengths to identify the cardinals as male and female. Surely this demonstrates a bias against single-sex relationships! Time for protesters to raid and occupy the NYT offices in protest.
/snark
The greatest evil…is conceived and ordered (moved, seconded, carried, and minuted) in clean, carpeted, warmed, and well-lighted offices, by quiet men with white collars and cut fingernails and smooth-shaven cheeks who do not need to raise their voice. Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the offices of a thoroughly nasty business concern. -C.S. Lewis
http://www.gmsplace.com/
Very homophobic of them (nt)
zuiko (Diary) Friday, December 26th at 8:28PM EST (link)Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. – Milton Friedman
Exactly!
Warner Todd Huston (Diary) Friday, December 26th at 5:39PM EST (link)Man, you are right about the cardinals colors. I didn’t think of that at first, but of COURSE the female is brown!
———-
Be sure and Visit my Home blog Publius’ Forum. It’s what’s happening NOW!
Link
Steve Maley (Diary) Friday, December 26th at 2:58PM EST (link)http://tinyurl.com/6t7bay
The blogger formerly known as ‘Vladimir’.
Sure, Christmas 50 years ago was simpler
Steve Maley (Diary) Friday, December 26th at 3:12PM EST (link)Wish list:
Toy trains
Books
BB gun
Puzzles
Dolls
Footballs, basketballs, baseball mitts
45s & LPs
Electric football & tabletop hockey
Note the absence of:
Cassette tapes
Quadrophonic stereo
Sony Walkman
VCRs
VHS camcorder
Intellivision
…and that’s just the stuff that has run a full technological cycle in the last 50 years.
The blogger formerly known as ‘Vladimir’.
And for most of us who remember 50 years ago,
Achance (Diary) Friday, December 26th at 5:44PM EST (link)getting just one of those things would have made for a great Christmas! My stepkids, youngest 22, barely even know what the things on your second list are. They’ve never seen one of those vibrating football or hockey games, or really a vinyl record, though I still have a few. They wouldn’t look at balls, gloves and the like as Christmas presents but rather just the “stuff” that goes with playing sports. The girl had a few dolls but never really had an interest. Killing people on video games was more fun than BB guns, so they never had an interest even though I tried. Books? What are those? They have seen “toy” trains, but they’re mine and waaay too expensive to let a kid touch!
In Vino Veritas
But that's exactly the point.
progressivemass Friday, December 26th at 5:18PM EST (link)You say that “Christmas is about Christ’s birth.”
For you. Not for everyone.
Atheists and Jews and Scientologists all get work off on December 25th. They all can spend time with their families on December 25th. They can all enjoy light and song, the lengthening of the day, snow, myths about a jolly fat man who breaks into your house distributing toys, often in direct proportion to the income of your parents.
And the ideals of community and good cheer that characterize this time of year for me are good ideals. Those are the sort of ideals we really need.
And therefore, it is perfectly reasonable for the NYT to not mention Christ. It is good when we have a holiday which everyone in our society can share.
This editorial does not want to exclude a slice of America from what Christmas is “about”, as you put it. There are many of us who think Christmas is a good and wonderful thing and do not worry about its origins or its etymology. Christmas can be a beautiful thing and have nothing to do with a man who walked the Earth 2,000 years ago.
“Why does Christmas have those ‘gestures of generosity and thankfulness,’ anyway? The Times does not mention why. It is, of course, because of the generosity and thankfulness taught us by Jesus Christ whose birthday we celebrate on December 25th.”
Sorry, but no. There are those of us who give gestures of generosity and thankfulness who do not believe in Christ. In countries where Christianity’s influence is essentially nil, generosity and thankfulness exist. Generosity and thankfulness do not belong to Christianity.
I agree with you to an extent about the somewhat bogus nostalgia, though.
You are so right!
aesthete (Diary) Friday, December 26th at 7:55PM EST (link)In fact, why don’t we apply your reasoning to all holidays?
MLK Day? Well, that’s easy, they can write an article bemoaning something dear to progressives and transpose it into nostalgia that is both unfounded in historical fact, and not mention MLK or civil rights and racial equality at all! After all, there are racists that get the day off on that day, too! And it’s good when we have a holiday that everyone can share in. MLK can be a beautiful day about respecting your fellow man and loving your neighbor without cluttering it up with such rubbish as “equal rights” or “I Have a Dream”, right?
Or maybe we can do the same with Veteran’s and Memorial Day, as well. What’s the point to making it unnecessarily divisive by having such topics as warfare and our soldiers come up? Far better to keep with topics that all Americans can agree with, like national unity and “community”.
And what’s up with the 4th of
What’s that I hear? You don’t think those are good ideas? Then I can only think of a couple of reasons why you would post the above: you think we’re stupider than we really are, or you are willfully blinding yourself to the woeful lack of logic of your argument.
Some friendly advice: take a tip from Hans Pritcher, a liberal who posts here from time to time, and be sure to use a modicum of logic the next time you feel like posting.
The act of defending any of the cardinal virtues has today all the exhilaration of a vice – G.K. Chesterton
Darn it!
aesthete (Diary) Friday, December 26th at 7:56PM EST (link)“And what’s up with the 4th of” was supposed to be longer than a sentence fragment. Oh, well…
The act of defending any of the cardinal virtues has today all the exhilaration of a vice – G.K. Chesterton
Sorry, but you've got a big flawed analogy
progressivemass Friday, December 26th at 11:10PM EST (link)Which is not a great way to prove something is fallacious in any case.
‘Cause the thing about Christmas is, we as a society acknowledge that it is okay to not believe in Jesus Christ as the son of God. I don’t suppose you dispute that.
We generally do not as a society acknowledge that it is okay to be a racist, say, or to dislike veterans. Doing either of these things will get to vilified in public, because they are wrong. See, those holidays serve a specific purpose that the vast majority of society agrees upon.
I’m sorry, but as much as anyone may wish it were so, Christianity does not hold such a place in our society.
Not at all.
aesthete (Diary) Friday, December 26th at 11:51PM EST (link)The fact is that, in the United States, and the Western world in general, December the 25th has been strongly associated with the birth of Jesus Christ and the Nativity story, as well as (to a lesser extent) with Hanukkah, and the point that the OP made was that it was strange that the NYT editorial ostensibly on Christmas chose to deal with an issue tangential to Christianity, while not referencing the event that is commonly associated with the holiday. You made the (correct) point that Christianity isn’t only adhered to by those of the Judeo-Christian persuasion, and that that’s why it was good that the NYT didn’t mention Christ. Then you made the ridiculous point that generosity and thankfulness aren’t exclusive to Christianity, which no one was arguing.
I then made the point through analogy that it would be silly if this was done with other holidays. My point is irrespective of the level of acceptability that the day’s purpose holds in society in general. If, for example, it became fashionable to be racist, my point with MLK would remain the same — that it would be ridiculous not to mention the purpose of the holiday when writing an article about it!
Again, I’m not saying that the NYT editorial board should have written paeans to Christianity in the piece, but not writing anything, whether good, bad, or neutral, on the “reason for the season”, so to speak, is absurd, and your tangential debate on the acceptability of said religion in society is irrelevant to the matter at hand.
(BTW, I apologize for my strong tone in my preceding point — it was unneccessary and rude.)
The act of defending any of the cardinal virtues has today all the exhilaration of a vice – G.K. Chesterton
i'm trying to remember....
chuckie (Diary) Saturday, December 27th at 11:02AM EST (link)….what percentage of americans identify themselves as Christians…better than 80%, i’m thinking, last time i looked….
….and i’m wondering how many it takes for you to consider them a “vast majority of society”….
…..and them i’m wondering again, if 80%+ of us think of ourselves as Christians,
how is it you can make a statement like..”Christianity does not hold such a place in our society.”….
….we – “as a society” – may not approve of racism…but, for some reason, we still allow Nazis to march through our streets in their cute little uniforms…
…we – “as a society” – may honor our veterans….but, for some reason, we still allow those nutcases to protest at soldiers’ funerals…..
……there’s a difference between “we, as a society” and “we, the people”…
….”we, the people” have made an agreement with each other, that each of us may believe as he llkes, and should feel free to speak his beliefs without fear of government persecution…..”societal” persecution, on the other hand, is perfectly fine – that’s what gets you “vilified in public”….
…..”we, as a society” actually are a Christian people, and we don’t much like people trying to take our Holy Days off of the calendar….while at the same time, jumping through hoops to get footbaths installed for a miniscule minority….
….but merry christmas to you anyway, and many happy returns of the Day, so there….
It is 76 percent but I guess the rest are the Rev Al's....
JadedByPolitics (Diary) Saturday, December 27th at 11:05AM EST (link)climate change acolytes…..though some of the 76 percent are probably double dipping on their Christian/climate change religions
Unified Patriots – How-To:
Activists Taking Action
I don't read NYT.
Rod_Patrick (Diary) Friday, December 26th at 5:30PM EST (link)I won’t buy NYT’s pretentious celebration of Christmas.
One thing the NYTimes can't do ---
10ksnooker (Diary) Friday, December 26th at 6:04PM EST (link)Is control the sun. If the current solar trend continues, it will soon be so cold, the glaciers growing so fast, the snow piled up so high, that even the dumbest of Obama voters will come to recognize that Al Gore is a kook.
And there isn’t nothing the NYTimes can do to prevent that fact from taking root in the minds of the voters. They will just have to go outside.
Republicans need to be aware of the go along, get along, trap being laid for them by mother nature. In particular, it wouldn’t hurt to remind staunch McCain voters of the impending hazards.
They can't
Warner Todd Huston (Diary) Friday, December 26th at 8:11PM EST (link)They can’t control one sun, and won’t even recognize another son!
———-
Be sure and Visit my Home blog Publius’ Forum. It’s what’s happening NOW!
And that's a 10.
mbecker908 (Diary) Friday, December 26th at 11:32PM EST (link)-nt-
Other than Lieberman and Grahamnesty, which "staunch McCain voters"
janis (Diary) Friday, December 26th at 8:24PM EST (link)might you be referring to? Other than those two and McCain himself, the rest of us are well aware that AGW is hooey squared. And a whole lot of us have been up to our knees or higher in the cold, white icy form of global warming already this winter, so don’t worry about us being fooled.
Christmas isn't really a "Holy Day"
baseketball (Diary) Friday, December 26th at 11:23PM EST (link)As far as I’m concerned, Christmas isn’t a holy day, or a day of compassion, joy, love, or a celebration of Christ’s life or teachings.
Christmas is the day that we remind ourselves, once a year, that EVERY day should all of those things.