This is what I see this morning.

A quick impression for you:



With some exceptions (and God bless them), this appears to be the state of the electorate right now. Full disclosure: even though I’m apparently a one-percenter, I’m glad that Romney lost because I think a Romney presidency would have been slightly more disastrous than four more years of Obama, and the Republican Party has, in my view, pretty much been in the process of a slow-motion implosion for the better part of the last decade. (And what the Tea Party movement became was a contributor to that implosion, as opposed to the galvanizing revival, as many conservatives have painted it.) What I had hoped — but not expected — is that, after a Romney loss (not to be confused with an Obama victory, which isn’t quite what happened last night), Americans would wake up and realize that they actually have to work together to find common ground and goals once the dust settles; that they are not enemies, but mere opponents. Alan Jacobs put it brilliantly:

I have seen (we all have seen) more and more articles, blog posts, and comments premised on the assumption that the writer’s political enemies really are enemies — wicked people bent on the destruction of all that is good and right in the world.

As for me, I don’t think people who disagree with me — about abortion, politics, religion, literature, whatever — are, on balance, any more wicked than I am. I just think that on the points where we disagree they happen to be wrong. That shouldn’t be such a difficult distinction to keep in mind.

After the North won the Civil War and Abraham Lincoln was re-elected president, the United States was probably in the most fragile position in its entire history. Some historically ignorant partisans may wish to claim that we’ve almost never been so divided, but until states start seceding from the Union and booting federal employees from their borders by force of arms, I call B.S. any such sentiment. To say that political tensions still ran high at the time of Lincoln’s second inauguration would be a fundamentally idiotic understatement. To their credit, both Romney and the president struck conciliatory notes in their respective concession and victory speeches. I don’t think either one put it quite as succinctly and eloquently as Lincoln, for whom, and for whose country at the time, the stakes could not have been higher:

With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation’s wounds, to care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow and his orphan, to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations.

The United States hasn’t literally been at war with itself these last four years; the politics of this election cycle (or the last several) haven’t literally created widows and orphans, and the nation’s wounds are metaphorical. Yet to judge by the rhetoric I’ve seen on Facebook, Twitter, blogs, and video clips this morning, you’d think that Obama had just kneecapped grandma with a tire iron, or that Romney’s evil minions had been dragging people out of their beds at night and slapping them facedown on the guillotine. This is not a war, people, and just as losing losing political ground in an election does not mean losing the soul of the country, winning ground in an election does not equate to a unilateral endorsement of a monolithic (partisan) vision of progress. What it means is that, for the next two-to-six years, this particular set of people has been elected to debate, discuss, compromise, legislate, administrate, and generally do the hard work of running this country on its citizens’ behalf. That’s it.

So if you’re out there gloating or sulking, put a cork in it. Put on your big boy/big girl pants, wipe the spittle from your mouth, shake hands with your opponent, and get back to the business of being good neighbors. If you can’t do that, then it means you’ve never been interested in democracy, but domination. Show a little charity, please. ☕


About tardishobbit

Reads. Writes. Watches movies. Occasionally stirs from chair. Holds an advanced degree in heuristic indolence. View all posts by tardishobbit

9 responses to “This is what I see this morning.

  • Daniel Swensen

    I think this has been one of the most fear-driven campaigns in history — which, I think, leads people into uncharitable expressions of relief, or winds them up further into paroxysms of terror. If Romney had taken it last night, I’m not sure I could have kept a level head about it. I don’t say this to make excuses, mostly to agree with you. Politics have gotten so ugly, and I just hope that the Republican party doesn’t decide they lost because Romney wasn’t conservative enough.

    • mjschneider

      Agreed. I would like the GOP to be more conservative, but not the way they currently understand the term. And I would certainly like the fear-based rhetoric to dry up and blow away, but, well, it seems that there’s no money in that. Based on this morning’s reactions, I expect that the next race will be twice as expensive, twice as vitriolic, and half as consequential as the partisans would have us believe.

  • David N-T

    Matt, the democrat-republican electoral divide strikes me as largely theatrics: to me, it’s the same kind of thing that happens when someone watches a sporting event or a wrestling match and hopes that their guy(s) win(s). The thing is that either way, the promoter wins, and the spectator’s contribution is essentially cheering or booing, not participating or writing the script. I consider elections to be largely a diversion: something on which people pin their hopes and dreams. That the reaction would be either elation or dejection is natural in such a system. Further, it is also striking that these contests often seem to be decided by hot-button issues, largely because both parties are so similar that the slightest hint of a difference has to be emphasized: for instance, while the two parties may disagree on how to intervene in other countries, they are both interventionist.

    • mjschneider

      Well put. I wouldn’t say that elections, in and of themselves, are a diversion, but I think the political establishment uses them as such. I believe that this was your point; I just wanted to rephrase, re-emphasize, and agree.

  • A dialogue on the cultural divide « Catecinem

    […] day after the election, I was disgusted with the bitterness and intransigence on display by partisans. Earlier this year, I ruminated on what it means to be conservative and the ways in which Americans […]

  • Rob

    What your seeing here is sum and substance why I avoid any news unless it’s from the morning paper or when I’m quickly skimming my phone. It’s become too enraged, too sensationalist and alarmist – I’m reminded of the Calvin & Hobbes sketch where the father is appalled by the nature of tv news reporting (which is only ever reporting the news to appease stockholders looking at ad revenue, the business of corporate news – God bless them, too; they’re simply doing their jobs as required to make a living); he ends up turning it off and reading the paper, too. No more alarmist outrage, personal health > Maddow, O’Reilly, Sawyer, Brian Williams, the local news teams, whoever. All of them, whatever.

    Rob B

    And, of one of the benefits of us being Wisconsin men: the state and local (at least here) newspapers are top notch!

    • mjschneider

      Er, I’m not so terribly keen on the local papers, either, in and of themselves. I actually enjoy reading some pundits and opinion-makers, so long as they stay away from mongering and hysterics. Apart from that, though, I do agree that sometimes it seems harder to find actual news — or, at least, just the facts. But most facts we encounter are already encoded in narrative, and that’s a whole other issue…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: