ENGLAND & THE US ELECTION
In one weeks time Pat and I fly to London for another doll and arts tour. In anticipation of our upcoming trip and the important election, I've been reading lots of articles online, including many from the New Yorker. The world is waiting to see the outcome of what many people believe is the most important presidential election ever held in the United States.
In an on-line New Yorker article on November 2, 2016 by John Cassidy entitled “Two Americas: Why Donald Trump still has a lot of support,” Mr. Cassidy quotes a former British Prime Minister, Benjamin Disraeli, who was a popular leader of Great Britain (twice) in the 19th century.
“We now have two nations between whom there is no intercourse and no sympathy; who are as ignorant of each other's habits, thoughts, and feelings, as if they were dwellers in different zones, or inhabitants of different planets."
Mr. Cassidy went on, ‘Disraeli was writing about the rapidly industrializing England of the 1840s, and the two nations he referred to were the rich and the poor . …The golf between Clinton’s America and Trump’s America, even though it can't be traced entirely along economic lines, is now a yawning chasm.’
I related to Disraeli and wrote a paper about him in a Modern History course at Tabor Academy. I found and reread my own paper today. I became fascinated with Cassidy's reference and quote from Mr. Disraeli and how it applies to next week’s U.S. election.
In another online article, a spoof by Andy Borowitz entitled, ‘Queen offers to restore British rule over United States,’ Mr. Borowitz says, ‘Addressing the American people from her office in Buckingham Palace, the Queen said she was making the offer ‘in recognition of the desperate situation you now find yourselves in.
This 240 year experiment in self-rule began with the best of intentions, but I think we can all agree that it didn't end well," she said.’
The Queen urged Americans to write in her name on Election Day, after which the transition to British rule could begin ‘with a minimum of bother.’