Sticks n Stones and Campaign Words
Sticks ’n Stones and Campaign Words
By Randall O’Brien
If ever there were a folk “saw” that is one hundred percent false, would not this be it: “Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me?” Mercy! As we know, words certainly may hurt—a lot. Cruel words harm the targeted victim, the one espousing cruelty, and the community of which the verbally abused and abuser are a part. Words matter. Contained within words is the power to bless or to curse, to accept or to reject, to make well or ill. Blessed persons, and persons who bless them, are healthy individuals, contributing to healthy systems and communities. Cursed persons, and those who curse them, struggle to know happiness and wellness. Ill will is never positive in human relations. Goodwill makes well. “Politics ain’t beanbags,” remarked a Chicago comedian in 1895. Boxing may be more like it. Those who do not wish to hit, nor be hit, some might say, should stay out of the political ring. Is there any such thing as civil boxing? Boxers fight to hurt, to win. Politicians and their handlers do well to learn from boxing’s cutmen who, before each fight, put petroleum jelly on likely places of impact on their boxer, particularly the face, to make the area slippery so punches might glide off. Politicians, like boxers, hit and are hit often. The 2016 presidential campaign is a battle royale between competing narratives. In the “Right” corner the narrative goes something like this: America is self-destructing. Illegal immigrants are overrunning our borders by the millions. Refugees, concealing terrorists, are knocking on our door and many want to open the door to let them in. Muslims threaten to destroy us, as they proved on 9/11, and must be banned. Obama is asleep at the wheel with ISIS, but is driving us over the cliff with Obamacare. Drug gangs and welfare queens run amok in our country. Police are disrespected. The government wants to take our guns, make us open our bathrooms to all comers, and impose abortion and same-sex marriage on us. The Feds want to run our schools and take away our religious freedom. They are totally kicking God out of America. Our military is being weakened. The Feds permit unfair trade agreements, while our jobs go to foreign countries. Global warming is a hoax. The Supreme Court is illegally rewriting the constitution. The madness must stop. Now! The old order must be preserved, now, before it’s too late! In the “Left” corner the opposing narrative counter-punches: America, land of the free, is at last becoming what it promises. Progress has been made. The march must continue. Racial injustice, including profiling, mass incarceration of African American males, and police brutality, must end. Black Lives Matter. Women must have complete control over their reproductive rights and decisions. LGBTQ discrimination is immoral. The Supreme Court got it right—same gender marriage is right for America. Transgender rights must be protected. America is a nation of immigrants. Welcoming refugees, helping immigrants and all impoverished Americans are moral imperatives. A strong, tax supported federal government safeguards social justice and poverty programs. Healthcare must be universal. Gun control is long overdue. Education must be available and affordable to all Americans, not just the rich. The environment must be protected through enforced regulations. All religions are equal. Religion must not block civil rights. Just change is underway in America. Full speed ahead! The battle is joined. Lines are drawn. Bumper stickers reveal camps: • Republican. Because not everyone can be on welfare • Guns don’t kill people. Abortions kill people • The government is not your baby’s daddy
Versus:
• Republican Health Plan: Don’t get sick
• Weapons of Mass Deception
• Science flies you to the moon.
Religion flies you into buildings It should be clear even to the most casual observer that America is a divided country. Comedian Jay Leno cracked, “According to the latest polls, 50% of Americans say we are a divided nation; the other 50% say we are not.”
Humans are tribal. People belong to groups. Survival dictated this necessity early on in human history. The phenomenon stuck. We love our teams. We compete to win. In America we have a Red Team (conservative) and a Blue Team (liberal). Barring war against a common foe, rarely do the two opposing teams cease fire. Instead, the competing sides battle for control of America’s future: Republican v. Democratic Party visions and platforms. The Raging Rhetoric of the 2016 Presidential Campaign Charitable discourse is not a hallmark of the current presidential campaign. Epithets spewed at candidates and others include: Lyin’ Ted, Low Energy Jeb, Little Marco, Big Donald, Little Hands Donald, Crooked Hillary, One for 38 Kasich, Luciferin-the-flesh, Crazy Bernie, Goofy Elizabeth Warren, Illegals, Unqualified Hillary, Liar, Killer and Loser. One candidate has been branded a “fiery populist demagogue,” an “outsider,” who has built a campaign on anger and fear. Incendiary attacks target illegal immigrants, Muslims, President Obama, a decorated war hero, party opponents, opposite party opponents, a candidate’s wife and father, the media, protestors, even the Pope. Supporters point to realistic fears of terrorists, job loss, immigration problems, trade issues, economy, military reduction, Supreme Court over-reach, executive branch fiats, national debt, attacks on police authority, threats to sanctity of life, religion, gun rights, and freedom, which demand strong responses. Passivity is a tool of the ruling class. Civility rarely brings needed change. Anger is the agent of change. Critics, on the other hand, decry “The Politics of Meanness.” Uncivil discourse is a frightening model for our children, they lament. Raw rhetoric would not be tolerated in a middle school student body election. Hostile speech is a form of abuse. Abusers must not be tolerated. Behind words of assault stands a violent assailant. The character of America and her politics is at stake. The Future of the Past The future of the past is upon us. Rough rhetoric and worse reverberate throughout the halls of the nation’s political history. The author of Gentlemen’s Blood: A History of Dueling, notes, “Men in public life called each other . . . liar, poltroon, coward, and puppy . . . fornicator, madman, and bastard; they accused each other of incest, treason, and consorting with the devil.” Jefferson was accused of having relations with his slave, Sally Hemmings. Lincoln was labeled a buffoon, ape, coward, drunk, savage, robber and traitor. President Cleveland was accused of beating his wife, and appointing brothel-keepers to office. Vice President Aaron Burr was charged, but not prosecuted, for murder for killing his rival, Alexander Hamilton, in a duel. Prior to becoming president, Andrew Jackson, previously a state senator, and a veteran of 13 duels killed Charles Dickinson in a duel. Even Lincoln narrowly avoided a duel while in the Illinois legislature after criticizing state auditor and future senator, James Shields. In the 1950s, Senator Joseph McCarthy’s “Red Scare” cost thousands of people their jobs. In the 1960s, Alabama Governor and presidential hopeful George Wallace “race-baited” a fearful populace, which then turned his hateful words into hateful deeds during the civil rights movement. Mississippi Governor Ross Barnette, and others before him, followed the same political course. In the 1990s, House majority leader, Dick Armey, referred to openly gay Democratic Representative Barney Frank as Barney Fag. Bumper stickers during the presidential years of the 1990s and later during the 2012 presidential campaign read, respectively, “Where is Lee Harvey Oswald When you Need Him?” and “Don’t Re-Nig in 2012.” Violent words and deeds in American politics are nothing new. Confession James Thurber wrote, “We all have our faults. Mine is being wicked.” Each of us has the capacity to be devilish or saintly, do we not? Today’s candidates frighten me, not because they are different than I am, but because they are not. Luther said, “We had better be kind to the prostitutes and murderers, because we are all made of the same dough.” To be sure, the current presidential campaign repulsively parades racism, sexism, bigotry, xenophobia, narcissism, misogynism, lies, name-calling, deceit, and bullying, among other vices. “If only there were evil people,’ wrote Alexander Solzhenitsyn, “. . . and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being.” There, except for the grace of God, go I. We must demand better of ourselves. The “politics of meanness” is not limited to individual candidates. Individuals come from cultures. Tillich has written, “No human relation exists in an empty space. There is always a social structure behind it.” Has society at large failed us? Have we failed ourselves? National pundits such as Maureen Dowd and Al Sharpton on the left, and Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter on the right, give voice to our anger and feed our thirst for aggression. Do we have a pathology of community? Where do we go from here? Hope “Hope is a verb with its shirtsleeves rolled up,” wrote Orr. Individual and communal wellness will take much work; but it’s worth the work. Where to begin? In his important book, The Righteous Mind: Why Good People are Divided by Politics and Religion, social scientist Jonathan Haidt posits, contrary to popular belief, reasoning follows rather than precedes strongly held views. Intuitions, or “gut feelings,” form in individuals before conscious reasoning attempts to support convictions. Therefore, trying to win an argument via reason as a means to change another person’s political stance is futile.
Working hard to understand another person’s position generates goodwill. Telling someone he is wrong is counter-productive. Respecting the views of others, rather than questioning their intelligence, integrity, and motives, allows for civil discourse. Reasonable minds may disagree. From biblical teachings, to Sigmund Freud’s postulates, to modern social science research, it is agreed that a significant determinant of human happiness is healthy relationships. ‘The Golden Rule” remains the gold standard for relational wellness. Love heals. Hate speech, on the other hand, effects dis-ease. How might the pathology of hate be treated? Eminent psychiatrist, Karl Menninger, offers five ways in his book, Love Against Hate: (1) Work. This, he states, is the moral counter-equivalent to war. People who work together love each other. (2) Play. Games release repressed aggression, a “burning off steam.” (3) Faith. “All things are possible for those who believe.” (4) Hope. Noted Luther, “Everything that is done in this world is done by hope.” (5) Love. “Love is the medicine that cures all sorrow.” Love is our most powerful weapon in our war on our aggressive instincts. Listening carefully and identifying with the other person, trying hard to “see where she is coming from,” and why, disarms opponents. Love listens deeply. Love sees the other person as God sees her. Practicing emotional calm is HUGE in effecting charitable discourse and transforming relationships. “Everybody thinks of changing humanity,” Tolstoy lamented, “but nobody thinks of changing himself.” Ah, but family systems theory teaches us that our own part in a relationship is the only part we have the power to change. Changing the way we relate to the other, however, changes the relationship. Let us dream. Perhaps one day the old folk saw may more honestly say, “Sticks ‘n stones may break my bones, but kind words heal us.” “Come friends,” invited Tennyson, “it’s not too late to seek a better world.”
J. Randall O’Brien is president of Carson-Newman University and a frequent contributor to Christian Ethics Today.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
