The Angels and Demons In Politics

I am watching a PBS documentary series on the Roosevelts. I suggest it to everyone.

Theodore was perhaps the most interesting President in history. He was funny, childlike, but full of bravado. Sometimes he blatantly ignored the constitution (when deep moral issues were not addressed by it.) I didn't really mind this, at least on the issues I agreed with. No surprise there!  Like the people of his time, I cheered him on for his understanding of the ordinary people. However, at other times, he seemed heartless, lacking all compassion. He said and did some horrible things that undermined his characteristic high moral values.

This is what brings me around to today's blog...

In the search for peace, we need to understand the deep complexity of people. We need to address every person's great potential for good and evil, including those we admire.  As I learned more about Roosevelt from the series, I began to deeply admire him. Some of the things he did and said, however, I despised. It does seem he often regretted many of the things he said and did, but not always and not enough. If he had been a mythic king, an ancient hero or a comic book character, he might have done and said all the right things. Had he been a character in a tragedy, his flaws would have brought him to a harsh, unforgiving end.

Being neither, but simply a real president and a real person, as likeable and intelligent as he was, he could not escape the human condition. Beneath the wonderfully charismatic exterior, were some ugly dimensions. As I watched the show, I found myself trying to justify his faults, attempting to elevate him to hero status. This is a grave mistake. In the attempt to justify the words and actions of a person, we may unintentionally justify the words and acts themselves. Roosevelt was human and was therefore flawed. It's that simple.

Is this important? And does it have anything to with peace? Yes, it is important, because in our attempts to make heroes out of good people, we sometimes try to make their blemishes shine in order to grant them the accolade and full hero status. We might also tarnish the best aspects of our opponent, to make them a true villain who fully lives up to our full hatred. Presidents and other famous people are much more likely to be depicted as either heroes or villains, angels or demons. This either leads to both exaggerated expectations of, and unapologetic demonization of people who are far too human to deserve either status.

And that's where peace comes in...

We will never find peace in a world of imaginary heroes and villains, angels and demons.  We will never find a president who neatly fits into either category. Moreover, we will not find a political party, a race, a religion or a territory that fully deserves our full opposition or admiration. In fact, the more people we lump together, the less likely the chance that they are all of one disposition.

It is true that people often identify with a group or another. The need to identify with a group is an essential human trait. So essential that most of us are willing to sacrifice a large number of our beliefs to be part of a group. This can be a very bad thing. However, each individual in the group is uniquely human, so all appeals to the members of the group should be humane. Instead of identifying the behavior of an individual with the behavior of the group as a whole, the group should be seen as a large number of varied individuals who tenuously agree with one another for political (or other) advantage.

Illustration adapted from The Purpose of Argument by John Coller

Why is this important? Well, the purpose of this blog is to appeal to people to put peace before political disagreement, so let's see where that goes...

I, myself, am a Republicratic, so when I look at my opponents, the Republicrats, I see a lot  of hard-headed people, almost impossible to make any reconciliation with. But I have met many Republicrats, and the few times that I didn't put them into a political category, I found we had much Each individual in every group does.
in common. Conversely, while I was bantering with my Republicratic friends about  the stupid things the Republicrats were doing, I enjoyed the time we spent hating together. But when I talk to the same people individually, I find we differ in some dramatic ways.

Election time comes near and I have only two real options: I can vote for the Republicratic or I can vote against the Republicrat. I join my Rebublicratic friends in stereotyping all Republicrats. I no longer think of them as individuals, but enemies fully deserving of my hatred. Nasty things are said on both sides, and I feel a gulf opening between the two parties. Wider and wider... Neither of us will allow the other side to be fully human, because to do so might weaken our own position.

This is an age old tactic, and I am not going to debate whether it is ethical or not. It is not. (Roosevelt actually dashed to pieces Taft, formally a friend and admirer of his in order to get more votes!) Nevertheless, it seems to be the way to secure elections. It wouldn't be so bad if everyone turned back to listening to one another after the election is over, but often harsh things have been said. Pride, self-esteem and public image do not allow for quick reconciliation. Peace and a strong nation that works together, ironically, can be destroyed by the election process.

Harsh words continue. Ordinary men become villains or heroes, angels or demons.

My advice on this would be that we need to stop bludgeoning one another during the election process, realizing that we all need to work together for any of us to win. But this process is as old as politics. It seems naive to think that it will change.

I do, however, have an idea which may sound strange, but seems to me like a fun way to ease animosity and help our nation heal from the election battles. It also sounds like something the ancient Greeks might have done, and much of the best in our system of government was inspired by these great thinkers. Here is my idea....

Declare the day after the elections are over a day of national reconciliation! A day when Republicrats and Republicratics celebrate together. This day is not a day for the victors to gloat. It is not for the victors at all. It is a day to declare a truce following the undeclared verbal war of the election process. It is a time to remember that our opponents are not angels or demons, but people that are maybe more similar to us than many in our own party.

Sounds a little pagan and really farfetched? Both parties would see it as a silly gesture not worth pursuing, and no one would cooperate. But what if...? What if...? What if we declared it a national holiday and got a day off work! I think the day off work would seal the deal. I think the shared relief of being off work might give the two parties something to celebrate together - regardless of all that petty politic nonsense. By the end of a long day of drunken reveling and backslapping, many people might even forget who won the election! Hopefully they would not forget the changes they want to see in America. In their drunken rambling with their political opponents they might see commonalities and possible compromises.  Hopefully they would remember both of these and the warm feeling of companionship.

Well, anyway, something needs to happen. We need the full force and intellectual power of both parties to make our nation climb to new heights. I want to see America become a nation admired by other nations for its working democracy, as it often has been in history. Yes, I am proud of America, but my loyalty goes to all its people. Not just those I agree with! Right now I recognize the problem, but lack a solution. If anyone has bothered to read this somewhat long blog, I am open to all suggestions. In fact, I need them in order to know which direction future blogs should take.