I’ve followed a little debate among family and friends
in a social media concerning the level of our political discourse during this
election cycle. My wife (who is a
Republican like me) took exception to people who began exchanges with phrases
like “How can you be a Republican and believe……….” Most of the respondents, left and right, were
careful to distance themselves from extremist views; and curiously, talked more
like independents than Republicans and Democrats. So why be either in the first place?
This little exchange highlighted how narrow and
infantile our media-driven (and I emphasize MEDIA-DRIVEN) political discourse
has become. Unwilling, unable or afraid
to defend their political views in a logical and cohesive manner, extremists on
both sides resort to name-calling and character assassination, to sound-bites
and half-truths, and to declare (as Al Gore once famously did) that “the debate
is over” (the implication of which was that if you disagreed with him, you had
no right to your disagreement). But I
see these posts, and in the larger political discourse, an equally dangerous
trend – while having someone disagree with your viewpoint does not necessarily
make him an idiot, it also does not automatically make his viewpoint valid or
worthy of respect.
Throughout the convention season this summer, we heard
how utterly useless and empty were the parties’ campaign platforms (documents
that ostensibly define what each party is) – they were to be ignored we were
told (except as they bound various factions of the party together.) But while in the practical machinery of
government they mean very little, they have very real moral implications for
the people who identify themselves with that party. Those who think that they can attach
themselves to a party while not embracing (and in some cases, privately
repudiating) the major tenets of that party, deceive themselves and create both
a moral vacuum in themselves and a public scandal amongst their countrymen;
because the one thing necessary to the proper functioning of government and
society as a whole is personal integrity.
Americans on both sides of the political divide assume quite rightly
that on any issue there is a fundamental truth and a right course of
action. Indeed, in any true debate, one’s
position must be put to the test of logic and reason, not emotion and
self-absorption (if I believe it, it must be true!)
Truth, real truth, is the final refuge of the person
who loves liberty – but truth is hard, it is often stark and uncompassionate –
truth involves sacrifice and suffering to perpetuate its ideal, and yet without
it, there is nothing to hang onto – we are at the mercy of our own government
(it is astounding to me that anyone could look at the world history of the 20th
Century – the “Century of Blood”, dominated by totalitarian regimes, both left
and right, who invented their own truths – and not see the very real threat
when it is abandoned.) Unfortunately,
most of our leaders today find truth a very flexible thing. Nowhere is this grievous fault better
exemplified than in the politicians’ mantra, “I am personally opposed, but….” If you can’t square your personal beliefs
with your public persona, you’re not only lying to yourself, you’re a fraud and
a coward. Who wants someone like that
leading the country? So you self-proclaimed
Republicans who favor big government when it’s pork for your district and free
enterprise when you’re raising campaign cash and you self-professed Democrats
who think you can be personally opposed to abortion in private, but support it
in public – stop lying. And it’s not
just the leaders, it’s all of us, who
say we're of a political party and then backtrack when it gets too
difficult or don't have the courage to cut ties over principle. A
person, like a house, cannot be divided against themselves. Be one thing or the other – that’s how we’ll
solve our political problems.
Two thousand years ago, the Roman politician Pontius
Pilate famously and contemptuously asked, “What is Truth?” In today’s America, he could be elected to
anything.
