I hate to do another political post, but I guess I’m about to.
The Republican Convention has really bothered me this time.
I should say some things before I go on. I’m much more a Democrat than a Republican. But I don’t think the normal demarcations between the two parties make much sense. I hold a number of viewpoints that fit with each party and a number that fit with neither. I think I’m more consistent than either of them, and I’m probably going to spend part of the weekend writing a post or two that articulates what I think, just for myself. Still, I find the Democratic Party to be more acceptable, and especially this year’s candidate, Obama. So, I fully recognize, as I’ve watched this convention, that I’m biased against it. But, I’m also a person who’s not unlikely to hear a Republican speak and agree with a lot and respect, too, much of what I hear that I think is wrong. I think the Republican ideas and Republicans themselves have something immeasurable to add to the country.
That said, I’ve found the Republican convention to be dis-heartening. I realized during the first full night, during Fred Thompson’s speech, that my reaction to what he was saying wasn’t anger. Instead, after watching that first night, I felt really sad. The reason was the meanness.
I don’t think I’m blinded by bias when I say that the Republican attacks on the Democrats have been of a different nature than the Democrats on the Republicans at their convention. Disagreeing with somebody can be respectful. Honest disagreement recognizes the validity of human differences. Honest disagreement respects the humanness, the value and meaning, of opposing views, and then, it continues to disagree because it is a view worthy of being disagreed with.
I think that a lot of liberals fail to respect the humanness of conservatives (especially of George Bush), but I don’t think the Democrats at the Convention, by and large, were so guilty. Consider Obama’s speech. He applauded John McCain, and called him a good man, and the crowd gave McCain what seemed like a sincere ovation. Obama further called McCain a man of strength and character, with his heart in the right place, and I think he meant it. His argument continued to state that McCain was wrong though. In Obama’s view, McCain represented viewpoints that looked like Bush’s, and that wasn’t the right way to go. The rest of his speech continued to attack McCain, strongly, but it did so on the basis of McCain’s positions.
That’s a valid, and respectful, way to make an argument. I don’t think, by and large, that the Democrats treated McCain much differently.
But the Republican convention has, thus far, not acted with even a hint of respectfulness. Over and over, I’ve heard belittlement. I’ve heard mockery. I’ve heart blatant attempts to otherize Democrats. We’re elitist. We’re immoral. We’re un-American. We’re selfish. Etc. You’ve heard it before.
Consider the slogans for the two conventions. The Democrats was “The Change We Need.” The Republicans is “Country First.” I think it’s telling to look at the inverse of those two statements. If Obama represents “the change we need,” then McCain represents either “the change we don’t need” or “the same.” That seems ok to me; it doesn’t demean McCain but suggests policy differences. The inverse of “we put country first,” however, is “you do not put country first.” That’s an insult. There’s no respect there.
Or compare Fred Thompson’s treatment of Obama: “This year, the Democrats have presented us with a historic candidate, historic in that he’s the most liberal and experienced candidate ever for the presidency.” It’s patently false, but worse, was there ever a moment in the speech or in the evening that recognize the actual significance of Obama’s candidacy? There just wasn’t. Here was a chance, and he instead pointedly sidesteps it and mocks the historicity of Obama.
Lieberman was more subtle. Here was an early line in the speech: “Being a Republican or a Democrat is important. But it is nowhere near as important as being an American.” That seems ok. It could be seen as saying that there are values and dreams that transcend politic parties, and it’s important to realize the things that Democrats and Republicans hold in common. But Lieberman then goes on to make a partisan argument that McCain is the only one of the candidates willing to work with politicians on the other side (which is verifiably false, too, as Obama’s ethics legislation and nuclear proliferation work would show). It’s pretty easy to then complete Lieberman’s equation. Obama doesn’t work across party lines as McCain does; therefore, Obama’s not American. That’s a meme that’s been prevalent in McCain’s campaign since the opening ad: “McCain: An American President for America.”
It only got uglier. I finally couldn’t stomach Giuliani, especially after he called Obama too “cosmopolitan.” Palin offered a good political speech that was almost entirely lacking in policy (even David Brooks said that, even as he was complementing the speech) but that was again mocking and demeaning. For instance, consider that famous line that a small town mayor was just like a community organizer, except with actual responsibility (Giuliani made fun of the community organizer role, too). How do you mock a social work position, especially one from twenty years ago?
I could really go on. The meanness has been the story of the convention. Every prominent speaker has been noted for it so far. I think everyone thinks it’s been a political success, but it’s been an awfully cynical success.
That’s why I’m sad when I watch this convention. It’s demeaning to watch. I get the feeling, watching this, that the people in that room and on that stage actively hate me. I wish they didn’t.
----------------------------------------------
One more thing, in this way-too-long post.
I’m teaching a Bible class this semester. On the second day of class, after all of the introductions were out of the way, a student raised her hand and said, “Mr. Pierce, can I ask you a question?”
She did: “Is Barack Obama the anti-Christ because they keep saying (at church) that there are all kinds of parallels between him and the anti-Christ?”
Several students echoed her question.
I also teach two classes that are glorified study halls for seniors, and they are all in their first government class and are pretty fascinated with what’s going on. I think I’ve had three students in that setting ask me if Obama’s the anti-Christ.
I honestly think that those students asking me that is just about the saddest thing I’ve ever heard, especially since most of them have heard this in church and from other teachers.
I remember Dostoevsky saying somewhere that to love is to see someone as God sees them. Or to always choose to see them in their best possible light.
How sad is it that the church is raising kids who can look at anyone and think that that person could be the anti-Christ? How much more cynical could we be teaching them to be?
It’s a sin to think
anyone is the anti-Christ, much less a decent man like Obama.
The dehumanization that we see going on at the Republican National Convention is having and will have damaging effects far beyond this election.
Labels: politics
