Political divisiveness... a new theory
There's an article in the Wall Street Journal this morning,"In Divided U.S., A Big Question: Who Gets the Kids?" It examines how the deep ideological divide between Red and Blue state people is being played out through battles for the mind of the younger generation. I had no idea that there are children's books out there called: "Help! Mom! There's a Liberal Under My Bed!" and "No, George, No! The Reparenting of George W. Bush". I've argued in the past that the media has overblown the cultural divide story, but when children's books get involved, that's a sign of something deeper.
First, an aesthetic note. At least when Dr. Seuss sought to spread propaganda, he did so with fun, flair, and creativity - not to mention from a far deeper perspective then simply the latest chapter in a partisan fight. From the description of these books given by the WSJ, they sound like warmed-over diatribes from former Crossfire talking heads, (slightly) dumbed down for 8 year olds. I am appalled that our children would be exposed to literature of such little actual value.
But I digress. Why are feelings so deep, so ideological disturbing right now? How is it that American society, a society whose very first amendment promotes free speech and diversity of thought and opinion, become a land where people needed psychiatric help to cope with the results of an election?
This morning, my answer is: graft and corruption, or rather the elimination thereof. Politics was once practiced by ward heelers and political bosses. The spoils system ran rampant. Your choice of party was controlled by who could get you a job, not what your ideological beliefs were. In such a system, politics did not define your soul; it was blantantly about self-interest. Who you were was defined by what you did, not so much what you believed. If you did the right things, worked hard, went to church, played with your kids, that was what mattered.
Now, we have elevated political belief systems to the realm of religious convictions. We're not partisans because of self interest, but because we've convinced ourselves that our party has cornered the market on Truth. And, like other religions, we protect our beliefs with all the zealousness of Orthodoxy. If you are a liberal and you suggest that abortion may not be a very good thing, you are not questioning a mere political position... you are questioning the very Gospel of the church of liberalism. On the right, try suggesting that public schools are not merely a necessary evil but in fact can be and have been a force for good in society. You will be shouted down with the zeal of a convert.
I don't want to go back to Tammany Hall days, but I'm not sure today's system is all that much of an improvement.
First, an aesthetic note. At least when Dr. Seuss sought to spread propaganda, he did so with fun, flair, and creativity - not to mention from a far deeper perspective then simply the latest chapter in a partisan fight. From the description of these books given by the WSJ, they sound like warmed-over diatribes from former Crossfire talking heads, (slightly) dumbed down for 8 year olds. I am appalled that our children would be exposed to literature of such little actual value.
But I digress. Why are feelings so deep, so ideological disturbing right now? How is it that American society, a society whose very first amendment promotes free speech and diversity of thought and opinion, become a land where people needed psychiatric help to cope with the results of an election?
This morning, my answer is: graft and corruption, or rather the elimination thereof. Politics was once practiced by ward heelers and political bosses. The spoils system ran rampant. Your choice of party was controlled by who could get you a job, not what your ideological beliefs were. In such a system, politics did not define your soul; it was blantantly about self-interest. Who you were was defined by what you did, not so much what you believed. If you did the right things, worked hard, went to church, played with your kids, that was what mattered.
Now, we have elevated political belief systems to the realm of religious convictions. We're not partisans because of self interest, but because we've convinced ourselves that our party has cornered the market on Truth. And, like other religions, we protect our beliefs with all the zealousness of Orthodoxy. If you are a liberal and you suggest that abortion may not be a very good thing, you are not questioning a mere political position... you are questioning the very Gospel of the church of liberalism. On the right, try suggesting that public schools are not merely a necessary evil but in fact can be and have been a force for good in society. You will be shouted down with the zeal of a convert.
I don't want to go back to Tammany Hall days, but I'm not sure today's system is all that much of an improvement.
2 Comments:
Ha ha ha! That is as good an explanation as any I've heard.
I like how you point to the evolution of politics from self-interest to Truth as a divisive point. There might also be an idea there as to why religion is so divisive these days.
Like politics, religion these days also tends to ask less of people - less requirements to participate, less day-to-day churchgoing. It's become more of a television event - observed and criticized, but not really participated in. I think that if religion and politics asked more of its followers, they would have less time to argue with each other, and be more focused on the things that really matter - the day-to-day implementation of those political and religious beliefs. This is a far cry from abstract, fundamentalist fighting.
Wow I think you've hit the nail on the head Pat
Post a Comment
<< Home