The Gulf Between the Parties

I wanted to share an illuminating discussion with a friend of mine. Mostly to the left of center, he manages to get along with me because I don't insist on having my way in our various political discussions. He expresses himself in a jovial and logical way, and thus I can engage in conversation with him without things getting too heated. Anyhow, he said that the difference between himself, as a liberal, and most conservatives was that he had no problem with a) the government providing "free" healthcare or b) paying more taxes.

Well, my thought after the fact (and I know he reads this blog occasionally, so of course I'll be diplomatic) was, "If you want to pay more taxes, be my guest. You have an opportunity every April 15. But don't presume that I share your willingness to let the government take more of my money."

*

As near as I can tell, the difference in attitude between left and right lies in the perception of the individual and their relationship to society.

The American liberal mindset says, "The primary social entity is the state, and it is the responsibility of the state to see that right is done to the greatest number. Individuals cannot be trusted to do what is right unless required to by human authority. It falls to an enlightened few to exercise that authority."

The American conservative mindset says, "Individuals are the most important social entities; they each know best how to pursue their own ends, and they will support themselves or provide charity to others in accordance with their personal conscience. Everyone has the opportunity to be in government, but everyone is also subject to the same flawed human nature, so no one should act like they're better than anyone else."

Now imagine these two viewpoints trying to figure out how to "fix" this mortgage mess. One side believes in government pledging support for those in need in some sort of latter-day noblesse oblige; the other side emphasizes individual responsibility in a sort of Darwinian "put up or shut up" scenario. Is it any wonder Congress is at an impasse? (Though I must point out that the Democrats, with control of both houses, could pass a bailout bill today, if they really wanted to.)

*

Another political behavior that's become of great concern to me of late, not with my friends, but within the blogosphere and various social networking pages is the utter dismissiveness of one side toward the other. This dismissiveness can take many forms, the most obvious of which is snobbery: if someone isn't Ivy-League-educated, of the right social class, associating with the right groups, or on the "correct" side of certain issues, they are beneath contempt. If they're not from Blue State America or agreeing with the ideas prevalent in those places, then they're gun-toting, Bible-thumping, inbred hicks.

Sarah Palin is simply the latest Republican target because she represents all of this, as did George W. Bush, Ronald Reagan, and Dwight D. Eisenhower before her. And why is it that Republicans are always cast by the nation's major newspapers or television news outlets as fools and idiots while the Democrat candidates are always depicted as superior, nuanced, or possessed of higher, better knowledge? Could it be that the individuals working in those news outlets share that snobbery and contempt for the people and beliefs Republicans represent? Perish the thought!

Occasionally, I hear, "Oh, but you're different, Bart. You're pretty nice, for a Republican/conservative." Good grief, is that supposed to be a compliment? I want to respond, "Well, gosh, thanks. And you're not too condescending, for a Democrat." I mean, really! What would you say?

The Romans had this problem, once upon a time. Cicero, perhaps Rome's greatest Senator and orator, was a provincial, and so was subject to mockery of this sort. And no doubt it has happened in every large society humankind has ever built. But d@mmit, this is America. We're supposed to be better than that. We're supposed to believe that "All men are created equal." Perhaps it's time we took a step back and asked ourselves whether we really believe that still and if so, what do we mean when we say it.

Brief Blurb on Bad Leadership and Snobbery

This line of thought was spurred by a comment from a friend, not due to anything that's happened to me recently. My friend explained that she was ignored by some high-ranking suits on an elevator and then given suspicious looks when she got off the elevator on the "executive suite" floor with them, as if they questioned her right to be there.

There are certain traits that have always bugged me about people in positions of authority or high social status/position, which is why I try not to emulate them or get into positions of authority (I’m as susceptible as anyone—lead me not into temptation). The things I don't like include:

• Being ignored as a person because I’m not of the right rank.
• Being treated as a lesser person because of my position.
• Being bullied or pushed around unnecessarily simply because someone in authority wants something.

I accept the concept of, and need for, rank in organizations. I even understand the need to expect higher levels of service based on higher prices. However, I’ve always distinguished between the position and the person. It’s the difference between respecting the office of the President, for instance, and not respecting that person's behavior. Or the difference between accepting that “Rank hath its privileges” but that “All men are created equal.” Rank and status are limited social features of a representative republic. We have aristocracies of merit, money, talent, privilege, political power, and aesthetic beauty, but the saner among us realize that those aristocracies are (or should be) limited in scope.

Unfortunately, some people just let the rank go to their head (or worse, let others' ranks go to their head), forgetting that, once off duty, these people have to put their pants on one leg at a time and that, oh yeah, they have to deal with people who don’t know or care what their special rank or power is. I'm not anti-aristocracy, anti-management, anti-leadership, anti-merit, or anti-rank; I'm simply anti-snob.