Dialogue: 4
Sunday, 11 December 2016
Stranger voters.
Reasons. They’re out there.
--
Just one point…
Voters may be stranger than they give us credit for.
But mainstream narratives supress our political imaginations.
I want to paint a picture of politics as a messier, less-dualistic phenomenon than the mainstream media makes it out to be. There are more than two plausible narratives. There are ways of thinking about politics that defy categorization.
Politics is reductionist: no matter what you think, it’s a binary choice.
But that’s looking through the telescope backwards!
Flip it around, and what you’ll see is this:
Although voting itself is binary, reasons are legion.
People vote for all kinds of reasons.
Some you’d expect. Received reasons.
Reasons given to us by the parties, the candidates, the media.
Political monotheism, and all that.
But there are stranger reasons to vote.
Indeed, the “possibility space” for reasons is vast.
There are as many reasons out there as we have time to think them up.
The only limit is our imagination.
Strange people tend to vote for strange reasons.
I’m strange. I voted for strange reasons. Did you?
So while I hear the mainstream trumpeting sterile reasons,
I’m inclined to believe that some of us, at least, don’t fit into tidy partitions.
Now when I say strange, what do you think I mean?
No, I don’t mean a Democrat’s idea of a Republican:
A racist, misogynist, xenophobe.
Nor do I mean a Republican’s idea of a Democrat:
A hippie flag-burning communist with sensitive feelings.
No! These aren’t strange. They’re expected, sterile stereotypes.
I’m so bored with them.
Aren’t you?
When I say strange, I mean actually strange.
Something that startles me. Catches me off guard. Makes me grin.
Forces me to re-examine my assumptions. Expands my cosmos.
Strange, as in, good, smart, and different.
Let’s play with that.
That implies a 2x2x2 matrix.
“Bad”/“Good”. Stupid/Smart. Sterile/Strange.
Brainstorm away!
Crescendo from sterile to strange…
[01] Stupid/sterile reasons for voting
“Bad”, stupid, sterile:
— Stanley voted for HRC because he hates Republicans.
— Cynthia voted for DJT because she hates Mexicans.
“Good”, stupid, sterile:
— Celeste voted for DJT because she likes The Apprentice.
— Damien voted for HRC because he likes blonde, powerful women.
[02] Smart/sterile reasons for voting
“Bad”, smart, sterile:
— Terrence voted for HRC because it’s politically correct: he’s an academic seeking tenure. In his position, opinions are a risky luxury he can’t afford.
— Sam voted for DJT because he’s a manufacturing CEO: his more agile competitors already moved their manufacturing operations to Mexico, but now they’ll be punished and he’ll be protected.
— Kim voted for HRC because she’s extremely wealthy: she doesn’t mind high income taxes because she doesn’t have an income to tax, but makes her money on capital gains. Profits immensely from artifically supressed interest rates. Views social programs as an insurance policy for the wealthy, a hedge against social unrest. Views regulation as a barrier to entry that protects her from competitors.
— Helen voted for DJT because she works in the defense industry, and, well, this sequester sucks. The military-industrial complex is good for business.
“Good”, smart, sterile:
— Susy voted for DJT because corruption is her number one issue, and she felt HRC had too many question marks.
— Thomas voted for HRC because the environmental end-game is his number one issue, and DJT seemed to care more about mining and drilling than conservation.
— Juan voted for DJT because regulation is his number one issue, and HRC didn’t emphasize streamlining the painful UX of compliance.
— Roger, a libertarian who has never voted Democrat, voted for HRC because he felt DJT posed a marginally increased WWIII threat.
[03] Strange reasons for voting
Strange reasons are harder to classify. You may react to them strongly as good or bad, stupid or smart. But I won’t categorize them.
— Jasmine has a vivid nightmare. In 100 years aliens invade Earth. If HRC does not pave the way for a one-world government, the human race will not survive the coming apocalypse.
— Olivia is an Evangelical Christian. Traditional sexual morality is her number one issue. She read Trump bragging about his numerous affairs and listened to the “pussy-gate” tape, which made her feel uneasy. But then her friend sent her this article: which compares DJT to King Cyrus from the Bible, a heathen king used for divine purpose: appointing a conservative justice to the Supreme Court.
— These kids vote for DJT as a protest vote against HRC for not being extreme enough, for some reason that makes no sense to anyone but them.
—Scientist with Malthusian views secretly working on unstoppable super-virus for wiping out the human race votes for HRC because less likelyhood that government cuts off the grants funding her research.
For the finale, let us imagine two Taoist monks, sitting in dialogue. Suppose they live in a small Taoist community, here in the US. I wonder… how might they have reasoned?
Xiang:
Master Tseng, the Tao teaches us to think beyond form.
What of this election? It presents us with a pair of opposites.
Tseng:
Xiang, when I am gone, you will be master in my stead.
So I will not answer first. You tell me.
What is the Tao of this election?
Xiang:
Surely, the Tao teaches:
“Know the male,
yet keep to the female.”
Tseng:
And you interpret this how?
Xiang:
Not only is HRC female, she is spiritually female.
That is, she represents peace, stability, harmony.
Does she not?
Tseng:
Is that so?
What else does the Tao say of government?
Xiang:
Lao Tzu says,
When taxes are too high,
people go hungry.When the government is too intrusive,
people lose their spirit.Act for the people’s benefit.
Trust them; leave them alone.
Tseng:
Very good.
And how do you interpret that?
Xiang:
It would seem to conflict.
DJT campaigns to lower taxes, simplify regulations.
HRC wants to take away people’s guns, DJT wants to leave them alone.
But it is more complex than that, is it not?
Tseng:
It is.
Yet in the end, you conclude HRC.
Am I right in guessing that it is because you think she is Yin, while he is Yang?
And you have a strong preference for Yin?
Xiang:
Yes, that is correct.
What would you say, master?
I am no-mind on this matter.
Open to suggestion.
Tseng:
Consider this.
The Tao gives birth to all things.
To the bull and the raven.
The Tao is beyond form,
But the Tao gives birth to form.
Government is in form; a thing of earth.
It is not beyond pairs of opposites.
Opposition is its nature.
Yin, yang. Back, forth.
Struggle manifest.
You see these parties at war?
A unity exists beyond these pairs of opposites.
But it is a unity not of this world.
Bull is bull. Raven is raven.
Who can unite them?
They come from one source. Proceed to one source.
But in this plane, they are separate.
Xiang:
I understand the teaching, Master.
But not the application.
Tseng:
Do not overly preference Yin or Yang.
The Tao is in both principles.
One is not right for all times and seasons.
When one is out of balance,
The other rises.
Can you see past the illusions?
What if DJT is more truly Yin than HRC?
I do not know.
In HRC, I see a cunning raven,
Sometimes masquerading as a bull.
Squawking: “I am the true bull!”
Other times, proudly raven. “I am the true raven!”
This is a false union. It is self-conflicted.
In its attempt to contain Other, it betrays itself.
In DJT, I see a bull who knows it is a bull.
There is no confusion about it.
“I am bull. She is raven.”
“I have bull-nature. I am not ashamed of it.”
And with a roar, it charges.
This is a form in-expression. A red red. The thing itself.
Xiang:
So, you are a Republican, master?
Tseng:
Is that so?
