Partisanship and
Unity: A Question of Priorities
First off, I’ve recently started a new job back into local
government. This time around, there actually are no real limitations to my
political expression other than of course it has to be done on my own time and
as a private citizen. Still, even if I CAN, there is the question if I SHOULD.
In particularly, one of my ideas for a blog post was to focus on what I’ve seen
are the problems with the current Republican Party. To be more (though not
completely) neutral, and to be more holistic I’ll instead take a look at both
major political parties, and the overall question we’re being faced with. It is
the question of partisanship and unity at time where there is no clear answer
and both will come with sacrifices.
A Few Examples of
Growing Partisanship
1.
The Supreme Court: Whatever our personal
partisanship, people seem to agree on the narrative that it was a circus. We
may disagree on who played the role of clown, on who the victim is, on whose
anger is justified. Regardless, the process itself was embarrassing. However,
it is but another step in several partisan Supreme Court nominee processes.
Before Kavanaugh, Justice Gorsuch was elected with a simple majority as opposed
to what had been established as needing 60 votes. Before that Merrick Garland
did not even get any official hearing.
2.
Lack of Common Friends/Enemies: The two times I
have seen the country united in my lifetime was first with 9-11, and then with
the death of Osama bin Laden. I’m not sure if there is a common enemy to be
found today. When North Korea is treated like a long lost friend at the same
time Canada was accused of stealing from us through unfair trade, it feels like
a bit of a mess. Russia, Saudi Arabia, Europe, China, the lines feel more
blurred than usual. Even domestically we are now in a time when literal, proud
Nazis can wave the swastika and have the U.S. President say some of them are
decent people.
3.
Questioning of Foundations: The Electoral College,
the FBI, the Press are but a few of the institutions that have been questioned
at a fundamental level over partisanship. There have been others questioned
recently, and there will likely be more that have less to do with their
inherent function, but more on their bias whether real or perceived. It forces
them into the partisan debate whether they wish it or not.
But What is
Partisanship?
The definition I’ll be going with among a few options is
thus: a firm adherent to a party, faction, cause, or person
We treat partisanship as a dirty word. Our very beginning as
a country was compromise. Two Senators from every state, representation by
population for the House, the Executive chosen by electorates that add the two
together? The system was built on compromise, on unity first and foremost. It
was not a Constitution built under one ideal belief system, but on being
acceptable to multiple divergent perspectives.
Partisanship risks that unity. Too much of it rocks an
imperfect often slapdash governance trying to balance, two, three, or even a
thousand different viewpoints. And the rocking, that pushing the boundaries is
rational, acceptable, and normal. It is not inherently right or wrong, good or
evil. It is choosing a party, faction, cause, or person over the country as a
whole because that whole is many things from beautiful to ugly, from brilliant
to ignorant.
The Democrats
I see two things eating away at the foundations of the
Democratic Party currently.
1.
Holding together a broken system: At some point
the Democratic Party became the keepers of our flawed system. As the
Republicans turned to anti-government rhetoric (more on this below), the
Democrats came to defend government as a whole, the place of the public sector
in society. The public sector holds purpose, it is necessary, but as stated
before, it’s deeply flawed and imperfect and perhaps it will always be. Still,
defending a weak castle invites defeat. Our institutions are human-led, and
there will be mistakes made, and in those moments Democrats as they are will
struggle as their defense of these flaws is highlighted.
2.
Populism
in the Democratic Socialist movement: On the flip side the growing movement of
democratic socialism that became more mainstream with Bernie Sanders in 2016,
which is gaining more traction and champions as an alternative system is at the
moment populist in nature. By populist, I mean a movement that defines itself as
representing the common people against the elite or other, as being for good
against a wrongness. Populism is powerful, it is dramatic, and most of the time
it is factually wrong. No major decision, however well-intentioned and well-informed,
no matter how expertly implemented and followed, will benefit all common
people. There will be people who will be adversely affected with no fault of
their own, it is the nature of having hundreds-of-millions of people in one country.
So long as democratic socialism gives itself a romanticized role of David vs.
Goliath, it risks losing sight of the nuances and consequences of hard
decisions.
The Republicans
I see three main causes that are shaking the Republican
Party.
1.
Defining government as the problem: I can
empathize with certain aspects and applications of government being a problem.
I can understand the wish to reduce government. I can respect having more
faith in the private sector. What disturbs me is defining government as a whole
as naturally, and without solution, the problem. It is like the CEO of an
airline company saying planes are the problem with transportation, or the
President of a fast food chain saying that meals should be done slower and
people should wait and really savor it. Those are both valid opinions to have,
only that those probably aren’t the people we want to have those opinions. When
elected officials on a philosophical level don’t believe in the institution
they are a part of, that they lead, when they see themselves as wardens trying
to keep ‘the problem’ to a minimum, it is hard to govern well. It is hard to
govern well when the very idea of governing well contradicts one’s belief.
2.
Lack of Information: The Republican Party has of
late been cutting ties to traditional sources of knowledge. Academia, the Press,
the scientific community, bureaucratic experts, other democracies, and so on.
To be fair, this is a two way street and I honestly can’t say who threw the
first metaphoric stone at the other, but it is leaving the Party with looking
at nostalgia and feelings over history and evidence. It handicaps policy and
implementation.
3.
The defense of bigotry: Most of the Republican
Party are not white supremacists from the Alt-Right or KKK. However, I have seen
many conservatives appear more offended, hold greater scorn for black men
peacefully kneeling during their football games than they do for white men
carrying torches and swastikas. Fighting back at liberals with “what about
Black Lives Matter?” as if there is some sort of political equivalency, whether
intended or not, protects an increasingly emboldened movement of bigotry.
Claiming they’re beneath notice, that there are more pressing issues, or
getting defensive is complicit. Kavanaugh highlighted the problem conservatives have with women too, a problem I only expect will grow as things are now.
We Cannot Have our
Cake and Eat It
I cannot say whether partisanship or unity is the correct
answer, because both hold merits and sacrifices. However, what I do see is that
more, not less, decisions will come to us in the coming years, and I think it’s
important for us to understand the choices we make. Is unity for the country as
a whole worth sacrificing one or more of our causes? If so, which ones? Is
partisanship over something truly important and vital to us worth widening the
rifts between us? What boundaries will we set for ourselves? Will we stop at
not breaking any laws? Will it be not to damage the integrity of our
institutions? Will it be stopping just short of violence?
And perhaps these two goals, partisanship and unity, are not
always so mutually exclusive. Perhaps there are people, causes, movements that
ultimately can bring us more together. However, it’s not what I’ve seen of
late, it’s not the direction(s) we’re heading in. We have let our passions get
strong enough, our beliefs solidified enough, that it is worth disrupting the
unity of America for many of us. And perhaps it’s the way it should be, but I
do take a moment to question it and consider the full implications.
Vote
Which gets me to my only direct answer at the moment,
because Lord knows if I didn’t feel so conflicted this blog post would look
quite different. Voting is a way we can let our voice be heard in a way that is
non-violent, that doesn’t require us to compromise, that can better show where
we are at now as a country. Even if you live in a place where you know your
vote won’t change the overall outcome, people are looking at the percentages.
They are looking and making decisions from whether a race that should’ve gone
70/30 ends up 60/40, a measure that should’ve lost by a landslide gets close.
While we all sort through this mess, which may take a generation or more to
unravel, we can also vote.
VOTE.
***
TAKE ACTION!
Vote.
***
What’s Next?
The other two ideas I still have on deck for a blog post are
my case for why bureaucracy gets a worse rep than it deserves, and my thoughts
on being in an inter-cultural relationship will likely be my next topics I’ll
cover. Maybe if some revelation comes from the Election I’ll post on it, but
hopefully this post will be enough to share my political (and partisan) thoughts for the time being.
No comments:
Post a Comment