Dignity in politics
This is not a political article, certainly it is about politics, but it is not political. My political ideology is irrelevant, nor is this an attempt to persuade people to support a certain party or think a particular way about an issue. Rather, I hope to highlight the general problematic nature of politics in the United States beyond the standard partisan divides that immediately come to mind. Rather, it is the partisanship itself that causes issue.
Perhaps it is naïve of me, which I will own up to, but my impression of the State of the Union was this: the president’s address to the American people is meant to connect us more directly to the political sphere that was designed to serve us. In that way, the State of the Union isn’t about partisan politics but rather an expression of service. The president speaks, then Congress acknowledges what he says and respects it.
When a person is the president of the United States, regardless of party affiliation, there should be some level of respect paid to this particular person. When the president gets up before Congress, this is not a debate or a rally, but a representation of the government as a functioning unit not only for the people, but a display for the rest of the world.
In the past few years, American politics have become a constant battle. There are two sides, the Democrats and the Republicans, and that divide permeates every situation in which politics is present, which is many. Each side is defined solely by it’s opposition to the other, rather than any necessary foundation of belief that once was expected. Opinions are weapons loaded with words designed to destroy on a debate stage, in Congress, in an interview, at the dinner table.
It seems that upon being elected to a position one should not abandon their party values, but refuse to allow them to become definitive to who they will be as a member of public service. Unfortunately, the war continues as soon as a person is elected into office, which only ensures the perpetuation of a fight that is not only unnecessary but foolish and ineffective.
Political parties in their simplest form offer the ability for various perspectives to be represented in a government. Therefore, whichever perspective is more pervasive in a particular area, the people of that district are represented by a person from that party. It is not going to be the same everywhere, hence the different parties, and that is okay. There will be different people who believe different things and that is quite simply reality.
In truth, there are more than two perspectives but America has two major political parties to represent two important values: tradition and progress. Put simply, that is what the Republican party and the Democratic party are meant to represent, two values, neither of which is right or wrong, good or bad, but rather two bases from which a civilization can derive from, both of which have merit.
Binaries are inherently flawed because nothing can be strictly divided into two distinct categories. Right and wrong exist as a way to understand the world. Certainly, it makes things simpler if people can be told what they can and cannot do, but that obviates important factors like intent, motivation, and context. Binaries cannot account for everything but, to an extent, a simplification of the world is necessary because of the massiveness of the undertaking. Despite this, binaries should not replace conscious understanding of the multiplicity that does exist.
This problem occurs in the presence of a two party system, in which politics is believed to be rooted in binaries that fail staggeringly to reflect a country of hundreds of millions of people. Those opinions are taken into Congress or the White House and even the supposed unbiased highest court in the land. Something is red or something is blue and if it is neither then someone will make it one or the other.
The American government is meant to serve the people, represent the people, and that does include conflicting opinions, but a congresswoman should not stand up during the State of the Union address and call the president a liar on the world stage simply because he falls into the opposing binary. This is not war. These opinions are not good and evil, but quite simply perspectives.
Progress — or liberalism — is inherently necessary for a nation to change. One must desire improvement based on an evolving environment for the persistence of an institution, if not, it falls behind and is no longer representative of the time or the people it means to serve. Alternatively, without tradition — or conservatism — an entity can fall apart in the face of change. It is tradition that keeps these institutions grounded in the most general values they were originally founded upon like freedom and liberty. Identity cannot be had without a past, without a self-definition, but that self-definition must be allowed to change.
In this way, both the values of the Republicans and Democrats are necessary to the functioning of our society. Arguably, this should be self-evident as there would not be political perspectives designated to these two values should they not both be true to successful governing. A government cannot be entirely conservative nor can it be entirely liberal because those extremes could never properly define a nation, let alone the world.
It is okay that conservatives and liberals do not agree, if anything it is a symbolic of a free world because a diversity of opinions are allowed. If someone’s beliefs do not adhere to another’s that does not equate to one being wrong and one right, but quite simply a difference of perspective.
The problem exists because the binaries are taken to their extremes. I believe the majority of Americans are fairly moderate and could probably find something in both the Republican and Democratic policy that they agree with, but for whatever reason, politics is sensationalized. The war between perspectives continues in Congress, which is to be expected, but the extent to which it is taken, to the point in which nothing can get done and there is quite literally no cooperation, then the system has failed on an astronomical scale.
These parties exist so that the diversity of opinions can be represented in the government, which is meant to be representative of the people it serves. That is going to look different for different places, but different does not mean opposing. Different is not synonymous with wrong, but people have begun to believe that is so from the aggressive, combative nature that politics has taken on for the sake of novelty.
I believe, again perhaps naively, when people are elected to our government, the animosity, hatred, and strict party lines should become blurred if not nearly unnoticeable. Representation has been given to people who give more weight to conservatism or liberalism by the particular representative they have chosen, but the elected representative now has a duty not only to those people but to the entire country.
A country cannot operate on binaries, it quite simply will fail, as we have seen in recent years with the stagnant policies and crippling misuse of power. When a person is elected, they represent their city, their state, their party, but they also represent the United States. A government cannot operate at war with itself, acting as if coworkers are debate opponents rather than allies meant to carry this country through the tumultuous world in which we live, which they will never be able to do in the current political environment that exists.
The United States government is experiencing systemic failure from its inability to act to the behavior of the politicians who are meant to represent us on the world stage. I do not know when dignity was something no longer expected in politics, perhaps it never was, but at the very least our politicians were meant to pretend to have standards. It is an embarrassment and I am humiliated to be an American. We deserve the mockery from other countries because the United States government is a circus act that performs day and night as if there are no stakes for real people who have entrusted them to do a job that has become satire on its own.
This is not pointing fingers or an endorsement of a particular ideology, but beyond partisan politics. The issues of abortion, gun rights, and other divisive topics are not the content of this article and I hope I have made that clear at this point. I know people will make these words political, but they are not. The American people should be angry, we should be furious, because our government has failed us and continues to fail us every day. Regardless of party affiliation, I believe this is a truth that transcends.
An institution meant for service and freedom of the people of this nation instead reeks of hypocrisy and self-aggrandizement. Perhaps there was never dignity in politics, but there used to be respect. Now, Congress cannot even give the President of the United States respect if they come from an opposing party and the people of this nation will respond in kind, mirroring the behaviors of their leaders.
A reality in which Republicans and Democrats do not treat each other as enemies and their representatives collaborate to do the job they promised to do might not be thrilling or newsworthy, perhaps not even possible. A government not at war from within might not be cinematic or worthy of a Saturday Night Live sketch. They might not write entire chapters about it in history textbooks, but it will ensure that there will be history textbooks to write and children to read them, so we must try. A failure of this magnitude would be catastrophic and I cannot help but anticipate it if we continue as we have.
