Pacific Views

Throwing Gasoline on the Fire

David Neiwert's essay about The Political and the Personal has generated much discussion in the blogosphere. In this post, David talks about why he cannot see himself voting for a Republican -- because the tactics of the party are so destructive that even good and decent Republicans are being used by an entity that is destroying the country and its constitution. The Republican party has been so corrupted by the negative forces that a vote for them implies support for the the anti-democratic and totalitarian policies that the Bush, DeLay, Frist and Scalia promote.

Along with David I also wonder: Where are the Republicans that believe that the politics of destruction is antithetical to everything our representative government should be? Why are they unable to see that going along with the bullying tactics of the current Republican party is undermining our form of government? The distrust that is engendered by the tactics used by those who will do anything to win (where the ends justifies any means) is totally corrosive to our body politic and as long as this is the way our government works, we cannot claim to have a democracy.

In a followup post David said:

More to the point, no conservative is willing to reckon with this point: It is Republicans who have clearly demonstrated that you can succeed by tearing your opponents down. That has, after all, clearly fueled their rise to power. That same success only militates for Democrats to play the same kind of hardball.

Of course, I want the rift to be healed. That is, after all, the reason behind the post. I want to be able to go back to voting a split ticket; I don't think a monopoly by either party is a healthy thing. But I don't think any healing's going to happen until conservatives realize that liberals and left-leaning moderates will not be rolling over for them any longer. The rise of violence, and the increasing use of the "dissent is treason" theme, is forcing us to draw a line. When they understand that we're willing to fight back, maybe we can have some old-fashioned civility.

I agree with David that one party monopoly is bad even if the winning side is mostly playing within the rules simply because it is human nature to become complacent and to think that your worldview is 100% correct and even moreso to stop listening to anyone that disagrees with you. Being challenged in your beliefs and your approaches is one of the best ways to understand the inherent problems with your approach and to find ways to improve your policies and your ideas. We really do do better if we have honest challenges that forces us to examine our ideas and our solutions. In a real democracy where everyone is heard and considered before coming to a consensus, all the stakeholders in the community build the policy with which they all can live with and support. This was the magic of the representative democracy our forefathers wanted to create, and now the tactics of the Republicans are destroying our ability to make it work because it requires trust.

Yet without some basic sense that the other side will treat you decently, the concept of turning power over to the other is inconceivable especially if you believe the other side's goal is to smash you. As David said, the rightwing has seen that they can gain the upperhand by employing tactics that poison the atmosphere and create an environment of distrust. Right now collaborating with the Republicans is to support the poison that they spread. (This was one of the reasons that the act of the AARP was such a betrayal of its members.)

There are some conservatives that see that the tactics the White House and Congress are using are unprecedented and appear to be the acts of people who believe they will never, ever be out of power again. We would all be better if these conservatives were stronger in their condemnation of this behavior.

The language that is used by the Rightwing is the language of a demagogue and is very carefully cultivated to do the most to create hate of the "other". Newt Gingrich taught his disciples to use language that always belittles your opponent. He works with people like Grover Norquist who fully subscribes to this tactic:

We are trying to change the tones in the state capitals-and turn them toward bitter nastiness and partisanship.

The problem with demagogues is they are the sand in the gears of democracy and sometimes even worse, they are active sabotagers of democracy. Vicious language can often lead to violent behavior -- we need to find ways to muzzel the rabid dogs (Gingrich, Rush, Norquist) and to find ways to present our case without resorting to the same level of hate language. Ultimately it is a matter of taking back our country from the bullies.

Posted by Mary at December 4, 2003 11:30 AM | TrackBack