Why I Support a No-Recline Policy on Airplanes

 

We are not wholly-individualized beings living in our own orbit; our actions can have negative externalities for those around us. 

In a new survey conducted by The Harris Poll, a shocking 41% of Americans said that they supported a ban on reclining seats on airplanes. 

I am, proudly, one of the 41%. 

Seat-reclination does not happen in a vacuum. It was, in fact, Kamala Harris who in 2023 remarked that "None of us just live in a silo. Everything is in context." 

(Read my post about "coconut-conservatism" here.)

So, being that we live in a context and are not, as Amitai Etzioni would say, "individual, free-standing agents," why do we care so little for our fellow travelers? 

I, being a 6 ft 3 in male, have a special disdain for airplane seat reclination. It is already a tight squeeze in there; to have the person in front of you recline their seat can make sitting comfortably nearly impossible. 

I recall one particularly awful flight from Arizona to New York. It was a red-eye (a flight that departs at night, and arrives in the morning) and I was already running on little sleep. Upon sitting down, the lady in front of me decided to, in an especially gratuitous fashion, recline her seat back. I was crammed, almost comically so. My legs had no choice but to rest in the aisle, occasionally being knocked around my the snack cart. For the duration of that flight, I was unable to get a wink of sleep; it was five hours of misery.

Now, you may ask: Why didn't I say anything? Why didn't I speak up?

It's a good question. I am not one for confrontation, especially in tight, public spaces. Plus, no one wants to be a Karen. 

Earlier this year, a couple boarding a Cathay Pacific airplane, traveling from Hong Kong to London, was banned from the airline for making a stink about a passenger's egregiously reclined seat. The couple's response to the selfish passenger, which was obviously wrong and wildly inappropriate (see video here), raises the question of whether allowing people to recline on flights, especially shorter, domestic ones, is a sustainable practice. 

I think that we ought to remember that we are, as Etzioni wrote, "not merely rights-bearing individuals but also community members who are responsible for each other." Let us act more in this way. 

at No comments:
By

How Do You Dress?

 


You'll find varying degrees of dress - or dressiness, if you like - on the political Right. 

Claremont fellow, Michael Anton, I am told, is a fastidious dresser. This is evidenced, not just by anecdotes I've heard from colleagues, but by pictures of the man himself.


He looks more a member of the Dave Brubeck Quartet, than a conservative academic. 

Similarly, Roger Stone, a beyond-eccentric fellow, with his rather unsettling back tattoo of Richard Nixon, has always been something of a men's fashion influencer. His - what looks to be defunct - fashion blog, Stone on Style, used to feature an annual "Best and Worst Dressed" list, wherein Stone, with what appears to be a well-trained eye for classy dress, celebrates and lambastes the looks of contemporary stars and television personalities. 


Some on the Right, however, prefer a more relaxed, or rather, shabby look.

I was intrigued by one of Jude Russo's blog posts for The Lamp titled New Pants. In it, Russo walks us through his rather limited and quickly fraying wardrobe, which he is more or less unbothered by. "Shabbiness," he explains, "isn’t exactly a choice so much as a comfortable and habitual way of life." Interesting... He goes on to say that "there is nothing softer than a pair of chinos that is about to disintegrate."

I'm thinking of one particular blazer that I own. A blue one. It's comfortable and well-worn, though the inside pocket isn't a pocket at all; it's a hole. I sometimes forget this, only to lose my pens in the abyss of the fabric. 

One of my work colleagues, who is something of a William F. Buckley Jr. expert, tells me that Buckley would throw a blazer over just about anything. He also told me that, as the years went on, the knot on his ties got looser and looser. 

Personally, I quite like the blazer-over-anything approach. It reminds me of Hugh Laurie in House.


Of course, what we wear and how we present ourselves is the first thing that people pick up on when they scan your person. So, even a fraying blazer over a schleppy shirt looks better than the schleppy shirt by itself. 

Anyway, I'm curious: how do you dress?

at 2 comments:
By

Do You Believe in Life After the Election?

 

We can't let this election - or any subsequent elections, for that matter - tear us apart. 

Our great nation has endured for nearly 250 years, and we will endure past this election, whether Trump or Kamala wins. 

Don't fall for the hyperbole that "democracy is on the ballot," That is utter nonsense. 

Everyone take a deep breath. 

I am, however, very much concerned by the unwillingness of people with disparate ideological perspectives to converse civilly with each other. Political division can, sadly, be our country's death knell. But only if we let it...

We must make a concerted effort to see the humanity in everyone, from the MAGA hat-wearing Trumper, to the pro-Kamala, liberal Democrat. Even the Zionist waving the flag of Israel must, at some point, see the good in the student protestor donning her watermelon pin and keffiyeh. 

All of this may seem radical, utopian, and naive, but I don't care. If we cannot treat each other with love and grace, we will definitely come apart. 

I'd like to share with you some examples of people - with a lot more influence than me - who have conveyed similar sentiments of national unity. 

Former Democrat Presidential candidate Marianne Williamson has been a great unifier. 

See here:

I could not have said this better. 

Princeton University professor Robert P. George, a conservative whom some know for his friendship with left-wing political activist and third party Presidential candidate Cornel West, lays the groundwork for how we can be friends with people "with whom we have deep moral and political disagreements."

Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro, too, has been sounding all the right notes regarding political polarization. We all remember that horrific day at a Trump rally in Butler, PA when a disturbed gunman fired shots at the former President, killing volunteer firefighter Corey Comperatore, who was, by all means, a patriot. 

Shapiro, during a press conference, remarked that "Corey was an avid supporter of the former President, and was so excited to be there last night with him in the community... Corey was the very best of us. May his memory be a blessing."

I was emotional watching this. But I wasn't alone. 

For a long time, I've been a religious listener of Robert Wright's Nonzero podcast. I was taken aback to see Mickey Kaus, Wright's former co-host, on the verge of tears when recounting Shapiro's beautiful remarks. 

Skip to 23:40 HERE.

J.D. Vance, to his credit, was exactly right to say that we would be terribly mistaken to "cast aside family members and lifelong friendships. Politics is not worth it."

And the Harris campaign, to their credit, released what I thought was a brilliant ad. In it, Kamala says that "the vast majority of people in our country have so much more in common than what separates them... We see, in our fellow Americans, neighbors, not enemies." 

There are, I'm happy to report, myriad examples of this spirit of depolarization that I've found on the web. 

The sanguine notes are, however, drowned out by a cacophony of negativity and disdain. X, especially since Elon's takeover, has become a sort of internet Wild West, where hateful voices, motivated by likes and impressions, are more visible than accounts promoting national unity. This is troublesome, but It is a reality we must come to terms with, at least for now. 

What you can do, however, is unfollow hateful and divisive accounts, and follow thoughtful accounts that don't engage in cheap attacks and demagoguery. Folks like Dean Phillips, Andrew Yang, Sohrab Ahmari, Robert George, Marianne Williamson, and others inspire optimism. Follow them. 

Again, there is plenty to be hopeful about, no matter who wins on Tuesday. We must, though, drop the platitudinous bickering and didactic rhetoric. There is humanity and love in all of us. And I mean all of us. 

Communities that shun pluralism inevitably become tribal. We can't let that happen. 


at 2 comments:
By
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)

Conversation Is the Only Way Forward

  By Frank Filocomo There is nothing more dangerous than an ideological echo chamber.  In Reclaiming Conversation , Sherry Turkle urges read...