The Duplicity of Politics

To be sure, politics has never been a gentleman’s game. The Congress of the United States has seen men beaten with walking sticks, men stabbed, and outright brawls on the floor of the institution. Perhaps most famously, Alexander Hamilton was shot and killed by Vice President Aaron Burr in 1804. Our nation’s history is rife with violence in government as ideology naturally intertwines with personality, things are taken personally, and tempers flare. That this is our history means that we shouldn’t be surprised at the vitriol shouted by politicians of every political party yet we continually loathe the negative campaigning while sometimes gloating when our chosen candidate lands a punch in the political arena. We are participants and viewers of this fight all while lamenting our own role and that of our elected representatives. The duplicity here is engrained within us and the political system. Politicians dare not reveal that they are friends with someone “on the other side” lest he/she risks alienating or simply infuriating his/her supporters. There are instances of this not being true of course. Former Vice President Joe Biden has repeatedly lauded Senator John McCain, Justices Scalia and Ginsburg shared a mutual respect and admiration, and the late Barbara Bush expressed her adoration for President Bill Clinton, politics aside. How are we as a populace going to shift politics from that of personalities and personal attacks to ideological/perspective differences and maintain respect for our institutions, our elected officials, and our fellow citizens?

This author recognizes the difficulty in such a goal in that I, too take part in the same duplicity in which most, if not all, of the populace participates. I dare say that it would be difficult for any established pundit within the major news organizations to retract their bias and being reporting the news without bias. I add that it would be difficult for an individual running for public office to reduce the negativity in a campaign, especially if the opponent(s) went negative in their campaign. So then, what is the path toward progress? I believe it lies in the public’s hands to erase the negativity and duplicity in politics. We should not react with anything but positivity when any candidate or elected representative is friendly with someone “on the other side.” Instead, we should applaud this at every turn. We should reject negativity in campaigns and push our politicians to behave with deference to their opponents at every turn. We should expect nothing less.

The difficulty in this is that politics and ideology is personal. The decisions made by our elected representatives have impacts on the lives of our fellow citizens. Affirmative action policies might mean that a minority will take the spot of someone equally as qualified that happens to be Caucasian, a woman might find herself using back alley abortions if state abortion clinics are shut down by a pro-life legislature, a member of the LGBTQ community could lose a job because of belonging to the community, and a child might lose out on a better education if in a failing public school and school vouchers are not available. These can indeed be life and death situations which means that not taking politics personally is nearly, if not completely, impossible.

Still, the path to less duplicity in politics is achievable. We must begin by having conversations. Understanding the perspective of those with whom we disagree is difficult yet necessary to further our emotional and political intelligence. I have asserted in previous articles that I don’t understand why Trump supporters can ignore and/or accept the President’s flawed character. Yet it is not unreasonable to see that Trump supporters likewise cannot understand why there is a lack of support for the current president. My opinion is no more or less important than someone that disagrees with me. The key here is that because they are opinions, they are equal and no one’s opinion should take precedence over another’s. No one is supported 100% and seeking to understand why a person is or is not supported challenges us to see things from someone else’s perspective and perhaps even has the potential to alter our support/lack of support for the politician. This can be scary as it can be difficult to admit when we are wrong and I dare say it is becoming increasingly difficult to see when we are incorrect given the plethora of biased information available to us all day, every day. However, if we can have conversations with people with whom we disagree with the shared understanding that we are seeking to comprehend, not seeking to agree, then perhaps the first steps can be taken toward mutual respect without regard to political beliefs. Again, I recognize the difficulty in this if the conversation revolves around life and death issues, but bridging the gap can’t happen if politicians and citizens of any political party continue to assume that those that don’t agree are stupid, misinformed, etc.

We must also stop accepting anything but respectful behavior from our politicians. Yes, the definition of respect can vary widely, but certain basics can be shared such as our accepting no negative campaigning and personal attacks in an election. In the 2016 presidential election, there were negative attacks during the primaries and general election from the candidates. We should not know, nor care to know, of President Trump’s extra-curricular activities excepting any criminal behavior. The same holds true for Hillary Clinton, Ted Cruz, Jeb Bush, Bernie Sanders, and the rest of the 2016 field of candidates. This certainly used to be the case; we need look no further than President Kennedy’s extra-curricular activities to wonder if he would have survived our current political and media climate. Certainly, the press during his presidency decided to cover other issues and left JFK’s love life to biographers. This cannot be said of today’s journalists as sensationalism drives ratings. Yet if the public collectively refuses to participate in the negative aspect of campaigns and governing at large, then perhaps the media and our politicians will take note and adjust their behavior. It is worth a shot because if we aren’t successful then we merely remain in the environment in which we currently find ourselves.

The media and the public must ask the same questions of any politician facing scandal, investigation, or questionable actions regardless of the political party. We must adhere to rules of civility and let our elected officials and journalists know when they have crossed the line, no matter the political party or bias. If we do this, then perhaps we can move ahead with a bit more solidarity and those issues that truly are life and death can be discussed with all perspectives on the table and the full understanding that mutual respect is a requirement at all times. Bipartisan legislation is possible. Bipartisan governance is possible on a continual basis. Bipartisan discussions are possible and all of these can result in the parties remaining cordial and even friendly. We should not reject the idea of true friendships across the aisle nor should we accept the idea that just because politics is personal means that the person across the aisle doesn’t truly care about his/her opponent’s, and their follower’s, best interests.

If any of this is impossible then we must resign ourselves to the fact that we will continue to divide and compromises will be few and far between. No, the LGBTQ community does not want to compromise and neither do pro-life persons; these are only two examples of how difficult it will be to achieve the goal of mutual respect and cordiality, yet at least this author still believes it is possible. If movements of all kinds can rise from grassroots efforts, then certainly this can be approached in the same manner. We have conversations with our neighbors, friends, and family then show up to town halls and meet and greets for those running for office and announce our desire for positivity and respect. We must reject those that do now adhere to these requirements so that it will eventually filter to every elected official at the local, state, and national level. We are the people that can change the narrative of our generation’s political story for the better and provide an example for our children. It won’t be easy. It may be nearly impossible, but “nearly’ is not absolute.