Watching the documentary, I couldn't help but think that George Wallace embodied all the things that make people resent politicians. What does the success of George Wallace say about Americans? Can the phenomena of George Wallace happen again today via a different candidate and/or different issue? How would his story have ended if he didn't get shot, and how would it have affected America? I suppose there isn't an answer to this.
I also feel compelled to say that his life was strangely like a novel. The plot diagram of his life is almost unbelievable.
I agree with you that Wallace's fluid idealism for the sake of garnering votes was pretty despicable. However I don't think that too many people knew that Wallace wasn't necessarily advocating ideals that he believed in, so the only thing that should reflect badly on his supporters is the fact that he had to present himself as a racist in order to appease them, which is no small thing to forget. Also third party candidates are still capable of affecting a presidential election even today, as evidenced by the successes of Ross Perot and Ralph Nader in drawing popular votes away from major candidates.
ReplyDeleteI would like to speak to Alessandra's question of what would have happened if Wallace had not been shot. While i do not believe that his injury had any effect on America, I think that it did play a substantial role in the recapturing of his true identity. When Wallace was shot I believe he was in someways humbled, and came to realize that the man he had become had ultimately brought him to his near death experience. If he had not been shot, he most likely would have continued to lose track of his true morals. I think the ending to Wallace's tale made us all forget the man he had become, but if he had not been shot, it would have been a completely different story.
ReplyDeleteI thought it was interesting, though, because when George Wallace changed his political stances to match the sentiment of the majority, he actually reflected what the people wanted. I realized that we criticize a lot of politicians they trade their ideals for the vote, but ultimately, isn't that what a democracy sort of demands? I'm not saying that corrupt politicians are better than honest ones, but I feel like it happens a lot because of the way our government is set up to cater to the majority. And-this is just food for though-is it better to ultimately have an honest and straight politician that doesn't reflect what the people want, or to have a manipulative politician that has to bend to the will of the people?
ReplyDelete