The lay of the land

As a small child we are taught right and wrong.  We are told not to lie, steal, and cheat.  We are told to play well with others and to value other human beings.  Yet, despite what should be a universal set of values, we arrive at voting age with views on a wide variety of issues that are widely and even violently diverse.

Huge proportions of the population describe themselves as being either conservative or liberal.  The stronger they identify with these labels, the more they seem to vilify those that oppose them.  For those at the extreme ends of the political spectrum there is no listening to the arguments and reasoning of their opponents, the very idea that they should consider the merits of their opponent’s argument or compromise and “meet them half-way” is viewed as sacrilegious and traitorous

I write this not simply as an argument for civility, compromise and deliberation, but as an expose' of political radicalization.  I intend to explore why it occurs, how it occurs, and how to pull the public away from its poisonous venom. 

How does someone become radicalized left or right in the first place?  The answer is you learn it from your parents and community. 

If you grew up in a union household, or if your parents were immigrants or a minority, you would have grown up in a world where Republicans were damned for laws that limited the strength of labor unions or laws that toughened immigration restrictions or where a republican cut to an urban assistance program made leaving or improving an inner city ghetto more difficult.  Democrats tend to support tough labor protection laws, the rights of minorities and immigrants, and through that have earned the loyalty of these groups.

On the far right in the USA, the psychology of politics is often tied to a deep Christian faith. In most ways this is a good thing.  Jesus taught his followers to “love thy neighbor”, “turn the other cheek” and “be a good Samaritan”.  His teachings promote love and honesty.  In this regard they are to be highly valued.  But there is one teaching that is particularly strong in fundamentalist Christianity, that when applied to politics is absolutely poisonous.  They are taught not to question to absolute truth of their dogma, their religion or their bible.  Absolute fidelity to your religion should theoretically be a good thing.  But when the same sort of unswerving belief is applied to political views in a democracy, the effect is catastrophic.  Democracy is after all based on the principal of compromise.  To participate completely in a democracy one must be able to preface al of ones beliefs with the statement “I could be wrong, but…”.

Democracy depends on compromise and pluralism.  A lawmaker should do the right thing not just for his base or his constituency, but for all the people.  Laws should be crafted to please the greatest number of people.  The views of the opposition must always be heard, listened to, and their desires incorporated into laws whenever possible.

A concept that stuck with me from political science classes is “tyranny of the majority”, the idea that a deliberative body, like the house or senate, would force a law through even though a sizable minority were vehemently opposed to that law.

When you look at the demographics of the Democratic and Republican parties, you see some real differences in the kinds of people that make up their membership.  Republicans tend to be white, rural, white collar and from the south and mid-west.  Democrats tend to be multi-ethnic, urban, blue-collar and from the northeast or west coast. 

Now that I have laid out the lay of the land as I see it, I will lay out specific views and solutions In my posts over the coming days.