I think emotions are good things. I have emotions, I ocassionaly display emotions. However, I think in the realm of politics, people should really try to set their emotions aside. You will have noticed that I have not blogged much about politics. Part of that is that no one that reads this will much comment on political things (not that I get many comments anyway, most people tell me in person they read this, I just take their word for it, as far as I know, me and one nerd named letterman are the only ones who remember it exists), and the other part is that I find myself caring less and less about politics.
Some foundational points. I don't consider myself a member/adherent/dedicant/believer in any political party. I was at one time a died in the wool republican, but can hardly muster any feeling besides disgust for that party now. And I can't follow any party so willing to stake its claim to the pro-abortion position as the democrats (not my only problem with their platform, but just a reference to one of my biggest problems with politics right now).
This election cycle, I think, has highlighted so many of the things that I dislike about politics now, but one of the overarching problems is the amount of emotion. It has really seen an escalation since Clinton was president. For some reason, a deep abiding, visceral hatred of Bill Clinton began on the right wing side (don't get me wrong, I didn't much like him, and think he is really smarmy). It fed upon itself until it was almost a religion of enmity from the right directed at all things Clinton. Funny thing is, as far as politics go, its hard to come up with too many things Clinton did, thus its hard to come up with real reasons for the hatred.
This of course was like a challenge to the Democrats/liberals, who rose admirably with their undying hatred of George W., to the point that I have a friend who will look at me and with a straight face blame the democratic legislators shortcomings on George W.. The cycle continues. People who once could agree with, or at least admit some admiration for McCain now hate him. Obama is just this side of the devil for many, and worse for a lot of the rest. And don't even mention Palin around someone planning on voting for Obama. They hate her with a passion that is usually reserved for those who have done you a personal harm, or emanating from the clinically insane. Not sure why. Disagree with her, go ahead. Think she is a horrible choice, fine. But the vehement level of animosity is amazing.
This all brings me back to my point. Too much emotion. We are not talking about choosing between someone who will save your childs life and someone who advocates running children over. This is politics. I cannot think of a decision that would be more helped in this country by a dose of reason and rationality, but that is falling further and further away from both. This is why soundbites, and scripted debates work so well in this day and age. Adherents to both can walk away claiming victory, and the candidates don't have to go to the trouble of actually giving information to the voter, because information is not what the voter desires. A pep rally is what he wants. Someone he can chant for, or hate his neighbor over.
I have a buddy at work who likes to say democracy has now failed (its more than a bit tongue in cheek, but he is trying to make a point). Now, I don't believe that. I believe our govt. (please don't bother with the definitional distinctions between what the U.S. actually has and a democracy, I know them, I get it, move on), was divinely inspired. However, it really only works in a nation of virtuous people (John Adams said that, not me).
Too often, today, people believe that they can have their moral/religious lives/selves, and also have their political selves, and their business selves, etc.. As if the different facets of their lives are and should be governened by a different set of maxims. Its a tragedy. Especially when its members of the church, who should know that all of our lives are meant to be governed by one set of maxims, and our character shouldn't have a different hat it puts on in the public sphere and the private sphere. There is no, I have to play by this set of rules because I am in the political/business world, and if I want to get stuff done and be successful, I have to play by those rules.
Anyway, this has gone on longer than I originally anticipated. But this is the kind of stuff that goes through my mind during an election cycle. Its sad, but this is how I see our current system.
7 comments:
I agree with much that you said here...except for a few points. Mainly, I disagree with the "our democracy only works in a nation of virtuous people." Just because John Adams said it doesn't mean it's not rhetorical nonsense.
There are a million such quotes by both Adams and Washington that sound good in speeches, but, in the end, don't carry much practical meaning. Instead, you should look to the people who actually wrote the Constitution.
James Madison said: “What is government itself but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary.”
The Constitution was drafted under the presumption that neither the citizenry nor the leaders of the nation were always going to be virtuous. Partisanship and factious dissent were also not unforeseen by the Founders. The government created by the Constitution was designed to be effective despite the people's failings and, quite frankly, I'd like to hear some examples as to how or why you (or your coworkers) think "democracy doesn't work." Just because people are getting angry at the government (or each other) doesn't mean our democracy is failing. In many respects, I'd say the opposite is true.
I also don't think we've reached any new lows when it comes to partisanship or anger in politics, though it is in vogue to pretend that our society is on the verge of collapse because Democrats and Republicans don't like each other. You can look back to the campaign speeches and literature of 100 years ago and see attacks that, today, would be considered beyond the pale. You can look back 50 years ago to see politics infused with racism and bigotry (the real kind, not the supposed racism we're seeing today every time someone disagrees with Obama). You can go back 40 years and see anger and divisiveness over a war that far exceeds what we're seeing today. Historically-dense periods like the one we're currently living in are always contentious.
Politics ain't bean-bag, it never was.
So, yeah, you and I can agree that this election season has been annoying and that people have a tendency to get too involved in their political causes/candidates. But, I think it's lame, bordering on just plain stupid to argue that there's some sort of systemic problem with the government simply because our politics have been heated in recent years.
Bryan you are a smart guy so I know you couldn't have missed that you are one of those Dan was talking about. I'm at times also one of those Dan was talking about. All of those past political arguments that you are referencing I'm sure were very heated. The difference I think is that our moral culture has crumbled. They could talk heatedly about rising gas prices and balancing the budget and at the end of the day, whatever. People are so polarized now, and that is members of the church as well. We don't have the luxury to vehemently debate such topics as the sanctity of marriage and at the end of the day just say oh well if it didn't go the way we wanted. I'm sure you will be shocked to hear this but, politics are not eternal. Peoples oh so beloved parties and there platforms will not be in the next life. However, the feelings and prejudices most likly will. Our behavior should be guided by the brothern now and in the past. The Twelve have always come from different backgrounds and political affiliations, however, they have always been united in the things of God and his kingdom.
Bryan, while it is true that now is not the most rancorous time in politics, it is unique in at least one aspect that I point to as one of the major problems.
There has never been a time when two political parties have had more of an embedded stranglehold on politics. Politics evolved constantly with ever changing ideas and problems. But, I think in the last 20 years specifically, our political system has become stagnent.
Now, if you will notice, while I did mention our govt. specifically once, the vast majority of my post was talking about politics, which is different. Our political system is broken and in at least as bad of shape as ever before (without the real possibility of reform leading to new parties to try to move us forward).
The politicians, and the people who should be holding them to account are doing either nothing, or the wrong things.
People have become so invested in their own political ideals that the become unreasonable and irrational. Thus the point of my post is about too much emotion.
My point is about people's dedication to their party to the exclusion of reason, or to their dedication to an idea, or program to the exclusion of rational discourse. Not about the actual functioning of the branches of govt.
700 billion is to expensive to vote for but I'll vote for 800 billion. WTF I give up really I do. The conservative movement is dead. They are to busy trying to be popular instead of being the bad cop/parent.
Oh and Dan you might have broken up with the Silver and Black but you are still in love. Break ups hurt and there is always a small atempt to "make it work".
The who? Silver and what?
On a side note BYU football is awesome.
I'm a silent reader of your blog, just since you weren't sure who reads it. I'm a Hansen, now a Sparks just in case you didn't figure it out yet. I will make this short, I agree with you. We can talk about religion, we can talk about different cultures and people, but when we talk about politics people blow up. It brings out the worst in us, and has the ability to literally destroy friendships and associations. I'll admit to being too emotional about it at times. I also must comment about virtue, and to Bryan, there is a difference between being virtuous and being perfect (angels). Of course if we were perfect we wouldn't need governing. But virtue...did the First Presidency of the church not insist that we choose leaders who are virtuous? It is absolutely necessary to have such a quality in order for a nation to succeed, or it will crumble...look at it with a spiritual and eternal perspective. Okay, so that was longer than I intended. The end.
Bryan's right that our current political system--at least on the national level--is neither more partisan nor more emotional than in yesteryear. The problem as I see it is that nowadays it matters a lot more.
Arguments about "the government created by the Constitution" aren't truly relevant, since the government we have today doesn't look like that. Among many other changes, the 12th, 14th, 16th, and 17th Amendments have radically altered that original creation. The gradual expansion of the franchise, from only landowners to every citizen born before JonBenét Ramsey, has also radically altered the political process.
In 1789 the vast majority of Americans had no dealings whatsoever with the new federal government. It dealt with the states and with foreign powers. That's not the way the federal government works in 2008. As its power over the people has grown, as we've developed the ability to vote ourselves bread and circuses, the temptation of rent seeking has grown irresistible. As the government behemoth has swelled to incomprehensible proportions, who can fight the temptation to let someone else do all the hard reading and thinking? And the political duopoly has found more and more efficient ways to exploit those temptations to buy our votes.
The problem is not that "Democrats and Republicans don't like each other." Emotional demagoguery notwithstanding, they like each other too darn much. They agree on the shared wedge issues they will never really settle. From the deficit to immigration to abortion, they have to hold on to these same emotional subjects as fuel for fundraising and consolidating their power.
No, the manipulations of the major parties are no worse today than when they paid Gilded Age voters in liquor. But they seem to be getting more effective, and the stakes are definitely getting higher.
Post a Comment