THE POPULIST
It's been a while since I posted my last essay, so I thought I'd try a new one. But this one is a challenge -- I have a lot of random thoughts that aren't very organized. I should have taken on a smaller more focused topic to write about. In other words, this is going to be long :-) . I wanted to comment on the election in this historic time, sharing a few thoughts, and probably decide to "publish" this in an unsatisfying not-yet-finished form.
Oh, and to give you a sneak peak, this is really about we who take sides in the end -- not about the "Populist" as I've sneakily titled this essay.
Also within my verbosity, I'm going to make a bunch of blanket statements, all of which can be argued with -- you'll naturally disagree with a few of them and I'll even be able to see your side. This is mostly "me" talking out of the thoughts in my head at this moment in time -- any greater truth is really up to you as you bear with me and consider these thoughts.
Our painting: "Today"
 |
| Washington's Inauguration by Jean Leon Jerome Ferris (Wiki Commons link) |
Whatever your position on any of these points, I wish you peace as we all go through a tumultuous time together.
---
A lot has transpired since the 2016 election -- in fact today is the inauguration day of Donald Trump, the 45th President of the US. I have also been considering throughout the week some of the words of Martin Luther King, Jr., whom we celebrated on Monday.
We're at a point in our history where everyone is asking questions and everyone is wondering what will happen next. Usually the questions are asked in an anxious voice. These are indeed uncertain times, and for a large number of us, our new leaders haven't given us a lot of encouragement. For others of us, our previous leaders didn't give us a lot of encouragement. In fact, the schisms that divide us manifest themselves as a gulf impossible to cross.
Our painting's models
My own world view is probably not yours. That's okay of course -- but here are some of things I am currently perceiving as I contemplate the landscape of "Today". (Keep in mind that I generally include myself as a member of the "left" but I've had a fair amount of experience also being on the "right" side of the political spectrum). I've sorted a few random thoughts to see how they look alongside one another:
- The "right" seems largely disenchanted with our institutions.
- A populist came along who doesn't seem that savvy or insightful, but who has a very concise populist message "Make America Great". The message ended up having a great deal of appeal among those on the right who are disenchanted with our institutions.
- Someone from outside the political system came along, appealing to the "left" with a populist message that was nearly as concise and appealing - something like "take back control from the elite 1% who have unfair power over us".
- The populist on the right represents the 1% and so his message is incomprehensible to the left. On the left he is seen as anything but "populist". But on the right, his message resonates. And in the face of no seriously viable contenders, the right chooses to run him as a candidate.
- The populist on the left had a viable contender whose pragmatic problem-solving style represented many institutions who are similarly striving to get things done.
- While the populist on the left eventually stepped back and supported the pragmatist on the left, not all of his supporters warmed to her message. Her message provided well thought out solutions for most of the "issues" that were brought before her. His message continued to focus tightly on taking back control from the 1%.
- Neither candidate in the end was perceived as likeable by the majority (see below)
- On the just-hours-old canvas of "Today", as new institutions form alongside new leadership, the "left" is already disenchanted. They were similarly disenchanted with our institutions during the time of George W. Bush. Disenchantment has swung dramatically back and forth during my adult lifetime.
Our painting's color palette
- The "left" sees the "right" as void of compassion because of a perceived prejudice.
- The "right" sees the "left" as void of compassion because of a perceived elitism.
- Extremists on the "left" act "elitist" -- those on the "right" feel judged.
- Extremists on the "right" practice racism and hatred -- those on the "left" feel hated.
- The "left" sees the "right" as uninformed because the "right" distrusts "facts" that they see as associated with the institutions they react against.
- The "right" sees the "left" as uninformed because they don't focus on issues important to them.
- With regard to religion, each side sees the other as "faithless". Each side values their own faith highly and faith frames their thinking.
- Both sides have a hard time seeing the perspective of the other. Some of it is geography or demographic, but a lot of it Social media. Social media polarizes each side's judgments and insulates each side from the perspective of the other. Social media is the brightest of pigments. With such a pigment and the thickest of brush strokes, extremists stand out with bold clashing contrasting brilliance. The extremists can be dazzling to one side, and garish to the other. Any other perspective is hard to see as it becomes "background" or obscured altogether.
- The "right" reacts with resentment and fear to everything the "left" expresses.
- The "left" reacts with resentment and fear to everything the "right" expresses.
Our painting's muted hues
Still with me? I may not be with me :-) -- this is getting a bit jumbled together, even in my own head. But with each one of these thoughts, a Facebook post, a Meme, an Internet comment, or an opinion piece, or a piece of journalism comes to mind.
Here's the rarest thing in my mind -- things I have yet to see on Facebook or on the Internet except in the subtlest most understated hints. I occasionally see this more boldly in personal conversation with people who are thoughtful and broad minded. Here's my "rare" list -- understated colors and muted tones somewhere in the background on the canvas of "Today" and largely unnoticed:
- A new understanding emerges
- The "left" can see why the "right" is disenchanted with our institutions and appreciate their traditional values.
- The "right" can see the value of some of the more pragmatic approaches of the "left" and appreciate the value of some progressive social change.
- Both sides understand what they have in common.
- The "left" finds greater value in compassion than in fear and hate. They emphasize compassion in the context of the ideals that define them as "left". This is so, even while becoming activists for the causes they believe in.
- The "right" finds greater value in compassion than in fear and hate. They emphasize compassion in the context of the ideals that define them as "right". This is so, even while becoming activists for the causes they believe in.
- Each side communicates thoughtfully and compassionately and listens to the "other"
- Judgment is minimized in place of good, positive, and creative ideas
How I saw the election of 2016
My own perspective of the election was initially just thinking that we needed a veto vote for the majority in Congress -- that was an institution which left me disenchanted, the low point being Sequestration and then the government shutdown in 2013. In waging a war of ideals against President Obama, Congress seemed to me to be neglecting its duty to come up with good ideas with which to carry us into the future. Hillary Clinton quickly emerged, but I still had quite a bit of resentment against the ending years of the Bill Clinton administration and his conduct in the White House. I then did some reading and was able to find quite a bit about her to like -- like others who I admire, she seemed to be a hard-working problem solver who believed the institutions of government could be reformed to indeed carry us into the future.
Then Bernie Sanders came along. He seemed to more sharply focus on the plight of the 99% -- and like many on both sides of the political spectrum, I was disenchanted by corrupt business practices that led us into the disastrous 2008 recession. Nobody had really stood up to that particular elite, and as respected friends were energized, I too found myself mostly in favor of Sanders. Deep in my mind, though, I felt like Clinton's pragmatic approach might work more effectively than Sanders' visionary approach.
And Trump came along as the other populist. He represented that very 1% to me, but to others the things he said represented traditional values. That was particularly so as politically oriented religious leaders on the right began to endorse him. As I mentioned above, both had concise easy to explain messages. Clinton's in comparison was complex and difficult to articulate. I once looked up candidate slogans over the years (e.g., "Give 'em Hell Harry") and found that the Clinton campaign had perhaps a dozen of them. Trump stuck with his one. His tweets were similarly sharp, simple, and to the point as you'd expect with a 140 character limit -- exactly what his constituents wanted to hear.
Trump's message was one thing, but his outrageous behavior another. I could see people I know on the "right" embrace the idea of change for the sake of traditional values ("Make America Great Again") but just about not vote for him because of his behavior, his lack of competence and experience, and his very visible lack of ethics. And just about any comment about him from the "left", in the media or in social media, demonstrates the horror expressed regarding his character. His character attracted the extremists on the right, but his message attracted a much larger group of voters on the right even thought they saw him as unlikable.
In the end it was the populist on the right (not really a Republican, but embraced by Republicans who tended to normalize him in their minds to the point where they could vote for him, holding their noses as the expression goes) running against the institutionally-oriented problem solver on the left. I had no trouble moving back from Sanders to Clinton -- I had already identified quite a bit about her that I liked. But others on the Sanders side never did move over.
In the midst of this were three earth-shaking events, all damaging to the rational-minded problem solver on the left even as she seemed unstoppable in the polls: "Fake news" (mostly on the "right"), the Russian hack and the calculated release of embarrassing emails to Wikileaks, and Comey's inexplicable FBI investigation which also seemed calculated to do the most damage to Clinton's campaign. Those who primarily saw Sanders as an outsider ready to reform government also saw Clinton as part of the establishment -- in their words, "in bed with wall street". Fake news reinforced that image. Wikileaks added fuel. Comey's announcement of the email investigation lit the fire. As fake news took hold, people were expressing views of Clinton that judged not her, but some horrible caricature that had been painted instead of her. (I would say that the view of the left toward Trump is also that of a caricature except that I haven't had much evidence yet from Trump that holds up against criticisms of his character :-) ).
The other force were the extremists -- the KKK for instance, or the extreme religious right, or the alt-right (as known in "Gamergate"). They took the populist's more outlandish and hateful rhetoric as license to move their extremism out of the shadows. Their hatred of the candidate on the left showed no limit.
I voted for her already knowing that these forces were formidable. I still expected her to win, but I wondered how she was going to move beyond the damage caused to her campaign by fake news, Wikileaks, Comey, and the extremists.
In hindsight, it isn't hard for me to understand how the sides became much more polarized than I've ever seen before. And it isn't even hard for me to understand how Trump managed a narrow victory. The folks at fivethirtyeight.com have analyzed what they said in response to polls, and his victory always remained possible given the closeness of the race and some of how polling can offer imprecise data. By election night, Trump had roughly a 30% chance of winning, and 30% events tend to happen all the time -- just under a third of the time.
Filling in the Gulf
So where do we go from here? We have a so-called populist in the executive branch, and we have the same "right" dominated Congress that has been a continual disappointment to me. Nobody really knows right now, but my guess is that he isn't going to have a lot of power and that Congress is going to have much more power than before. I don't fear a fascist regime, but at the same time, I understand those who do. (As an interesting exercise, read Trump's inauguration speech sometime, and then read Hitler's ).
My side, the "left", is going to have to do some soul-searching. We seem blind to the fact that when we say or post something in outrage over what someone on the right has said or done, others on the right will dismiss it as part of our elitism. While gaining approval from our friends on the left, it's not going to close the gulf in the slightest. But if the gulf remains open, we're going to have a nearly impossible influence over the next election or among those now in power today.
Clinton didn't loose because of any fault of her own, or her campaign, although I've read plenty of criticism and analysis that makes that claim. She had good ideas and she had a positive outlook ("When they go low, we go high"). Trump isn't some genius that somehow manipulated the system to his advantage -- but he happened on the right circumstances.
Voters tended to like the more tightly focused messages of Trump and Sanders. One of those, Bernie Sanders, will always have my admiration for holding the very wealthy and the very powerful ethically accountable.
I'd suggest that a future candidate should be as pragmatic and as positive as Clinton was, but with a very focused message - preferably one that considers the inequitable influence and inevitable corruption of leadership by the 1%. But even that isn't going to work unless we Americans begin to bridge newly-widened gulfs.
My Christian faith focuses on the teachings of Jesus -- and among those teachings are a multitude of examples of being called to love and have compassion for others across similar social gulfs. The well known parable of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:25-37) is a great example of such a teaching. Honoring God above all and seeing ourselves as humble servants is another quality to which those of my Christian faith strive. That too leads to bridging gulfs -- a positive reverence of God as our creator quickly quashes fear and hatred that divides us from one another.
Put into practice (and I speak for myself), that might mean stepping back from the pure enjoyment of a good barb against the other side. Put the memes aside, and instead consider why it is that someone from the other side, if they are not an extremist, voted the way they did. There is a reason large numbers of people on the right distrust some of these institutions -- government, science, medicine, education, the press, business, law enforcement, and religion. There are reasons many on the left distrust others of these institutions. Instead of judging and condemning, a more productive course would be that of Hillary Clinton insofar as we identify what we can improve about those institutions. How can we support those who we know closely who work within those institutions, just trying to make the area of their responsibility work as well as possible?
Conclusion
And instead of ideological camps, anger and hatred (which exists on both sides in abundance), how about applying energy to upholding what we see as the best of humanity -- intellect, character, humility, reverence, compassion, forgiveness, ... there are many examples which are also found in abundance among what Jesus was always asking of those with whom he communicated.
I believe Trump must prove himself now that he is our president. My opinion is also that he is off to a terrible start (inauguration speech and cabinet picks). Ditto for our Republican Congress. I believe that activists must fight for compassion and I admire Martin Luther King Jr., for the example he and his followers set so many years ago. On my side of the political spectrum, I applaud and support those who march, those who petition, and those who work within the system. I support those of the press with journalistic integrity who hold our leaders accountable.
As a Christian, I also believe in praying for our leaders, even these new ones, as directed in the Bible (1 Timothy 2:1-4) that we may all live quiet, holy, and peaceful lives, made better in that process collectively.
But I believe that both sides could make significant progress toward filling in the gulf, simply by refraining from anger-fueled judgment and attempting to appreciate each others' perspective. These are the ideals for which I pray most as I pray for our leaders and as I pray for ourselves.
During times in which I feel more optimistic, I have an assurance that such ideals put into practice will quickly move us into a brighter future. During times in which I feel more optimistic, I find myself thinking that in spite of the doings of a Populist, we may actually find that America is Great in a new way that we Americans haven't ever seen before.
During times in which I feel less optimistic . . . well, we always have Internet memes :-)
---
PS - Events are happening very fast -- I started composing this on the day of the inauguration shortly after watching the coverage and have edited it a few times since. Since I started this essay, the weekend was highlighted by the history-making Womens' marches throughout the country, all defined by positive energy, loud voices, and nonviolence which I felt inspiring. I'm proud of the fact that Denver had among the 5 largest demonstrations in the country. I admire very much those who marched, those who are politically active, and those who are working to effect change in so many ways. I admire even more those from each side that are actively seeking to understand the other side as I've tried to communicate in this essay. These are indeed historic times.
