For a church that has experienced it's fair share of persecution based on hyperbole and half-truth, we sure seem ready to dish it out to others. There are three attitudes that I see on my side that really bother me.
FAILURE OF GOODWILL
John Gardner, the secretary of health, education, and welfare under Lyndon B. Johnson gave a good definition of political extremism:
"Political extremism involves two prime ingredients: An excessively simple diagnosis of the world’s ills and a conviction that there are identifiable villains back of it all... Blind belief in one’s cause and a low view of the morality of other Americans–these seem mild failings. But they are the soil in which ranker weeds take root... terrorism, and the deep, destructive cleavages that paralyze a society." (John Gardner, No Easy Victories)
From 2001 through 2008, I was really bothered by all of the obvious hatred that the left felt for GW Bush. To me it felt like they were right there with him leading up to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, but then as soon as things began to go south, they turned on him. And not just by way of disagreement or principle. It seemed to me that some of them took an almost devilish pleasure in calling him a liar and pointing out each little fault or stumble. They considered him too stupid to write a speech on his own, yet clever enough to trick them all into supporting his adventures in the middle east.
After President Obama was elected, I hoped that the right would take a higher road. That if my side disagreed with him, it would be for good policy, not because of a visceral dislike for the man. Nope. One of the first anti-Obama books that I saw was "the Obama Nation" by Jerome Corsi. Nice little play on words there, right? Obama-nation, abomination. Subtle. It reminded me of when some second-grade bullies at school thought it would be funny to call me "Contami-Nathan." Ha ha, never got old.
I was surprised at how quickly the far right was able to foment a distrust in and a hatred for President Obama. Not for his policies, but for him as a person. It was just like what the far left did to President Bush during his tenure. And what the right did to Clinton during his and the left did to Reagan during his and... do you see a pattern, here?
I'm all for political debate and disagreement, but doesn't this feel reminiscent of the anti-mormon attacks on Joseph Smith? Digging and prodding for any unsavory details while ignoring any good that he might have accomplished?
DISMISSING OPPOSING VIEWS AS INVALID
My dad gave me a recording several years ago by Hugh B. Brown. In the beginning, he addresses his audience of graduating BYU students with some political advice. "First, I’d like you to be reassured that the leaders of both major political parties in this land are men of integrity, and unquestioned patriotism. Beware of those who feel obliged to prove their own patriotism by calling into question the loyalty of others... Strive to develop a maturity of mind and emotion and a depth of spirit which will enable you to differ with others on matters of politics without calling into question the integrity of those with whom you differ. Allow within the bounds of your definition of religious orthodoxy variation of political belief... I’ve found by long experience that our two-party system is sound." (Hugh B. Brown, Profile of a Prophet)
I went into the Masters in Communication program at Eastern Washington University as a defender of the conservative faith. I often engaged with my professors and classmates in political debate. I emerged from my studies with my conservatism intact. But I had also gained a respect for my friends on the left that I didn't have before. I realized that they actually had many good arguments for their positions and that if I didn't see any validity to my opponents' point of view, then it really meant that I didn't understand that point of view very well.
PROPAGANDA AND THE RAH-RAH RIGHT
Talk radio. I ate this stuff up when I was in my twenties. All of the hosts are funny. It felt great to feel like I was part of a movement. To feel that there were millions of like-minded folks all over the country that were "in the know."
But in my thirties, I began to have a change of heart. One quote that President Hinckley gave has stuck with me. "Our generation is afflicted with critics in the media who think they do a great and clever thing in mercilessly attacking men and women in public office and in other positions of leadership. They are prone to take a line or a paragraph out of context and pursue their prey like a swarm of killer bees." Gordon B. Hinckley, Standing for Something
I began to notice that most of the stories weren't about promoting the politics of the right but about denigrating the members of the left.
I also began to see how self-serving it all was for the talk show hosts. "Hey, i just came out with a new book. Hey, I'm coming to speak in your town. Hey, the democrats are attacking me again, they want to shut us down. Hey, I just hired a new private security guard- I'm really putting my life on the line to get this to you." Just a constant siege mentality. Always talking about broadcasting from bunkers and threats from our government (I know it's a joke, but really). The point is, the shows may be about politics, they may be about advancing the conservative agenda (whatever that is nowadays), they may have their sincere moments, but at their heart they are about promoting and sensationalizing the host.
I mostly listen to NPR now. Not because I agree with the politics of their hosts, but because I much prefer their tone of discussion and willingness to at least pretend to look at both sides of an issue.
So that's it. I'm not trying to change anyone's politics, but can we please be nice to each other?
1 comment:
This is so good!! I need to let my neighbor read this. The negativity just eats at your soul, and some of these guys are just making a living at it. I wonder if they always believe what they are spouting or if it's just something to perpetuate their pocket books.....
Post a Comment