APPEASING A THUG – The Misplaced Notion of Moral Equivalency In Hyper-partisanship

As mid-term elections loom, many Americans—I think from both sides of the divide—are bemoaning the sorry state of our political and social discourse. I keep hearing the suggestion that any return to civility will require both sides to tone down their rhetoric and try to see each other’s point of view.

Yes, they say, Trump and his neocons bully, degrade and lie…but the “liberal elite” bitches, moans and schemes right back.

This well-intentioned attempt at some kind of balance should concern every American as much as the political and cultural rift itself.

      When someone breaks into your home, starts taking
      your stuff and threatens the future of your children,
      there is no requirement, no expectation, of civility.

There is no moral equivalency in responsibility for the bitter enmity between Trumpublicans’ systematic trashing of cherished, hard-won American values to feather the nests of the rich and powerful, and the Progressives’ impassioned resistance to it. No more than there was in the deadly Charlottesville standoff between white supremacists and decent, mostly peaceful counterprotesters standing up to them—a clash which Trump was quick to blame on “both sides.”

Nope. When someone breaks into your home, starts taking your stuff, perhaps tells you to get out because you’re not like them, and threatens the future of your children, there are not two equally-valid arguments. There is no requirement, no expectation, of civility. You yell; you scream; you strike back the best you can with whatever you’ve got. And you don’t stop until they’re caught and gone.

A SNOWFLAKE’S CHANCE IN HELL – Fear and Loathing In the Trump Era

Listen to this deluge of campaign ads! Notice how much of the republicans’ message is about fear? A couple of spots running here in MN epitomize it: “I would never vote for so-and-so; he won’t protect us;” and “So-and-so will make Minnesota a sanctuary state for criminals.”

Fear is much easier to incite than any positive passion like hope, excitement or love. With fear, all you have to do is dangle it out there and people—mostly folks who are, I suspect, already deeply insecure—will bite.

It reminds me of Stephen King’s approach to engendering fear. He realized he can stir more fear by merely suggesting the presence of some horror than by actually showing it. That’s because we human beings are so good at filling in the gory details in our imaginations.

Of course, it helps to objectify and demonize the thing you want folks to be afraid of: Cujo, Christine, the Mist…immigrants, the media, smart people…

       It’s easier to be against something that someone
       else’s vision and hard work have created than it is
       to do the work of creating something better yourself.

A CONSTRUCTIVE VISION
There’s another spineless premise at work in the republicans’ message. Attacking someone else—someone you portray as The Enemy—requires none of the clarity and courage it takes to say what it is you stand for. Easier, it seems, to be against something that someone else’s vision and hard work have created than it is to do the work of creating something better yourself.

Both these intertwined, negative attitudes—fear and negativism—are not only gutless, they’re lazy and undisciplined. They require no constructive imagination, no work whatsoever. And, worse than the ignorance inherent in them is the fact that the beliefs they rest on involve not defensible truths, but—to use their proponents’ own term—“alternative” facts.

ILLUSTRATION: iStock/dane_mark

The problem we progressives face in coming elections is that we’ve found no one—yet—on the national level to lay out a vision of the kind of peaceful, prosperous future intelligence, creativity, joy and hope can inspire. Unlike fear, positive concepts like this have to be articulated. And they have to convince conservatives that being constructive just might address their complaints as well, or better than, being destructive.

Perhaps the most difficult nut to swallow, for both sides of the divide, is that the new, positive approach must embody a measure of reconciliation.

        Not a person famous for nothing but fame
        itself, but one with deep insight, an expansive
        outlook and real integrity.

WHO WILL TURN THE TIDE?
During the disastrous second term of George W. Bush, the only solution I could imagine was for a charismatic leader to emerge who might articulate hope for a nation still on wobbly knees from 9/11. My prayers were answered.

Sadly, though President Obama embodied nearly everything we needed as a leader, he failed to use his eloquence to full advantage. And, for reasons I’m convinced the neo-cons are too smart to ever say out loud—though Trump is all but doing so for them—he was met with a degree of political rancor and obstruction one would have thought reserved for a true tyrant.

Once again I’m praying for a charismatic leader, one who can make the distinction between beliefs and facts, articulate a view of the future that doesn’t require Americans to talk circles around the values we know undergird this great country. Not a person famous for nothing but fame itself, but one with deep insight, an expansive outlook and real integrity. One with a deep, selfless love for both country and planet.

Tall order, right? I figure it won’t be the first time the loving power I call God has called on us to be his instruments in delivering a miracle. So please, please, even if you feel insignificant, even you’re deeply disillusioned with our political system, don’t give up. Come Tuesday, November 6, get out and VOTE! And while you’re at it, see if you can help a couple of other people who might otherwise not be voting to do so too.

We can do this…we must do this!