I've become increasingly frustrated and indifferent (after all, doesn't one follow the other?) over the last several weeks in light of current political events. As enthused as I am about the ideals of peace, love, and individual liberty, there is some grand sense of Sisyphustic futilism in trying to carry these ideals forward within the deep, black heart of the whirlwind we currently find ourselves in. And the ever-widening scope of that reality continues to push me further into a voluntaryist position; not because I believe that a pro-active stance in the fight against aggression isn't called for, but rather because I'm coming to believe that change through the political process is not only increasingly impossible but increasingly fruitless.
My own personal evolution towards the concepts of cooperation and non-aggression has admittedly, and unfortunately, been a slow one. I certainly don't pretend to be a genius, as I also don't pretend to have all of the answers to society's numerous problems. But what I do claim, if I can claim anything, is a growing disposition towards consistency and reason in the evaluation of various ideas and concepts. I'd like to believe that all adults move down this path, even if they ultimately reach different conclusions within their own evaluations. A little intellectual honesty and some basic logic can prove to be wonderful tools of self-restraint when checking your premises and progressing as an individual; and even more importantly when exchanging your ideas with others.
But what I've come to realize is that most people would trade any sense of intellectual curiosity or self-criticism for any number of easily accessible rhetorical jabs from the myriad of political cliches that have been forged over the years:
If it saves one human life, it's worth it....
If it wasn't for those troops dying for your freedoms...
No one should have to die because they can't afford....
America is a Christian nation...
You just want poor people to die...
Everything changed on 9-11...
Our jobs are being shipped overseas...
If you don't like it you can leave the country...
The will of the people...
_______ is a basic human right...
Sadly enough, I'd be lying if I told you that about 95% of the political discourse I've been exposed to couldn't be distilled down to one of the zingers above. Of course, that's not to say that, in certain instances, there aren't legitimate and well-thought out positions masked by some unfortunate verbiage. However, more often than not, I don't think this is the case (especially when it comes to politics in general). I think a better way to grasp reality regarding the American politico would be picturing one group of people pre-occupied with tradition and geo-centric familial tendencies and another group pre-occupied with social class and disparity in the productive capacity of individuals. These two teams that we'll call "Republicans" and "Democrats" put on their jerseys every morning and pull tired diatribes from an over-used playbook (see: above). Their fans cheer and jeer, regurgitating those same tired mantras, all the while never really seriously questioning the means by which they wish to meet their ends. Instead, good intentions will have to suffice.
Now, this description doesn't apply to everyone. There are a plethora of self-critical people on all sides that have legitimate positions. I'm not typically one for simply generalizing (it smacks of collectivism). However, it's hard to ignore the prevailing political trend. And I'm sure this is nothing new, but I believe that recent events have brought many apathetic people to the table. We already had the overwhelming majority of people in this national discussion talking past each other. Now there seem to be even more people doing it. Not only has that conversation gotten louder, it's also become increasingly tense and obtuse. Complex and integral conversations regarding legislative particulars, economic consequences, and the nature of ethics have been largely drowned out and traded for the mindless banter of those engaged in what amounts to chest-thumping in a political turf-war.
And what part do I have to play in such a wonderful and democratic system of "might makes right?"
The answer that I find myself coming to is "not much." Is that being too pessimistic? I really don't think so. In fact, I think it might bring like-minded people to a focal-point; if we acknowledge that no political process or victory there-of (this includes centuries old pieces of parchment with steadfastly ignored dictates) will ultimately result in peace and the cessation of initiated violence, then the road ahead is clear. We have no choice but to re-open a grand discussion on the nature of ethics.
It's become relatively evident, at least to me, that we're no longer stopping to check our premises; particularly when we reach the juxtaposition of the political and the moral. If we, those opposed to coercion and force, are to see our ideas through to fruition, we will move our agenda ahead for not if reason and critical thought are superseded by a tribal sense of political tradition and devotion. To put it another way, you can feed a broken engine fuel all day and it will not run. A million great ideas put before the brow of a refusing individual will prove futile in the fullest sense of the term. What we need, I think, is a new approach altogether.
If reason is in fact dead, then in order to move forward we must sew the seeds of its rebirth. People have to learn how to be more critical, not only of others but of themselves. Without people actually being capable of stopping and analyzing their own positions and the positions of others, no true exchange of ideas can take place in any meaningful sense. Note that I'm not claiming such a move would even prove beneficial in the sense of my own personal ideals. It could very well mean that we move in a new direction altogether. What I am claiming, however, is that a move towards more peaceful ideals will be practically impossible to sustain without the prevalence of true philosophical reasoning.
With this new found insight, I think that my approach to all things political may change substantially. And in that way, I certainly hope that my ideological "exchanges" with other individuals might prove to be more productive. If in passing conversation I can make one or two people in my lifetime question their own predispositions...maybe even to the point of abandoning a point of view with violent consequences...then I think I'll have pulled my weight in life. Ignoring immediate, albeit temporary, political victory may be very costly for those like me in the short-run, but if this re-evaluation in our approach gave us the tiniest glimmer of hope for achieving lasting peace, then maybe it's time to start re-writing our own tired playbook.
No comments:
Post a Comment