Teal

Profile

Username:
tealstar
Name:
Teal
Location:
Matlacha, FL
Birthday:
09/26
Status:
Married
Job / Career:
Publishing

Stats

Post Reads:
261,446
Posts:
1116
Photos:
8
Last Online:
15 days ago
View All »

My Friends

1 day ago
20 days ago
> 30 days ago
> 30 days ago
> 30 days ago
> 30 days ago
> 30 days ago
> 30 days ago

Subscribe

Teal's Modest Adventures

Politics & Legal > Brilliant Analysis of Political Divide
 

Brilliant Analysis of Political Divide

Martha Adams posted this OpEd from the New York Times on Facebook. It is so good that I am repeating it here.


@nytimes DAVID BROOKS/OP-ED: We live in a big, diverse society. There are essentially two ways to maintain order and get things done in such a society — politics or some form of dictatorship. Either through compromise or brute force.

Our founding fathers chose politics.
Politics is an activity in which you recognize the simultaneous existence of different groups, interests and opinions. You try to find some way to balance or reconcile or compromise those interests, or at least a majority of them. You follow a set of rules, enshrined in a constitution or in custom, to help you reach these compromises in a way everybody considers legitimate.
The downside of politics is that people never really get everything they want. It’s messy, limited and no issue is ever really settled. Politics is a muddled activity in which people have to recognize restraints and settle for less than they want. Disappointment is normal.
But that’s sort of the beauty of politics, too. It involves an endless conversation in which we learn about other people and see things from their vantage point and try to balance their needs against our own. Plus, it’s better than the alternative: rule by some authoritarian tyrant who tries to govern by clobbering everyone in his way.

As Bernard Crick wrote in his book, “In Defence of Politics,” “Politics is a way of ruling divided societies without undue violence.”

Over the past generation we have seen the rise of a group of people who are against politics. These groups — best exemplified by the Tea Party but not exclusive to the right — want to elect people who have no political experience. They want “outsiders.” They delegitimize compromise and deal-making. They’re willing to trample the customs and rules that give legitimacy to legislative decision-making if it helps them gain power.
Ultimately, they don’t recognize other people. They suffer from a form of political narcissism, in which they don’t accept the legitimacy of other interests and opinions. They don’t recognize restraints. They want total victories for themselves and their doctrine.

This antipolitics tendency has had a wretched effect on our democracy. It has led to a series of overlapping downward spirals:

The antipolitics people elect legislators who have no political skills or experience. That incompetence leads to dysfunctional government, which leads to more disgust with government, which leads to a demand for even more outsiders.

The antipolitics people don’t accept that politics is a limited activity. They make soaring promises and raise ridiculous expectations. When those expectations are not met, voters grow cynical and, disgusted, turn even further in the direction of antipolitics.

The antipolitics people refuse compromise and so block the legislative process. The absence of accomplishment destroys public trust. The decline in trust makes deal-making harder.

We’re now at a point where the Senate says it won’t even hold hearings on a presidential Supreme Court nominee, in clear defiance of custom and the Constitution. We’re now at a point in which politicians live in fear if they try to compromise and legislate. We’re now at a point in which normal political conversation has broken down. People feel unheard, which makes them shout even louder, which further destroys conversation.

And in walks Donald Trump. People say that Trump is an unconventional candidate and that he represents a break from politics as usual. That’s not true. Trump is the culmination of the trends we have been seeing for the last 30 years: the desire for outsiders; the bashing style of rhetoric that makes conversation impossible; the decline of coherent political parties; the declining importance of policy; the tendency to fight cultural battles and identity wars through political means.
Trump represents the path the founders rejected. There is a hint of violence undergirding his campaign. There is always a whiff, and sometimes more than a whiff, of “I’d like to punch him in the face.”

*****************
What stands out for me is that conflict is normal and inevitable and compromise is not only desirable but essential. We can't always have everything our way because we live in a diverse world.

xx, Teal

posted on July 11, 2016 8:30 PM ()

Comments:

I just returned from a trip to Lake Geneva and was grieved to see so much
sentiment for Trump throughout the region. It is not rational.
comment by elderjane on July 16, 2016 3:09 AM ()
He's got part of it down, the anti-science, anti-education, anti-politics qualities of the Republican Party which are ascendant. Sarah Palin was one of the last stepping-stones to Trump, in all her fresh, unspoilt idiocy. But Brooks doesn't detect the roots of the Bernie Sanders movement at all, although he mentions an outsider present in both major parties. That was never merely a "new broom sweeping clean" thing that happens with most elections.
comment by drmaus on July 12, 2016 8:22 AM ()
The people who suffered from Republican policies, deregulation that led to the mortgage crisis, taxes for them, not for the wealthy keep voting for Republicans. Their anger is misdirected. A democracy that works is only possible with an informed public. Anger feels so much better than learning the truth.
reply by tealstar on July 16, 2016 5:44 AM ()

Comment on this article   


1,116 articles found   [ Previous Article ]  [ Next Article ]  [ First ]  [ Last ]