Claiming “Otherness” is a useful thing in political
campaign. It helps establish the
perception of a moral center around which one’s allies can rally. It assists in the creation of an antagonist
to further a narrative. “They” are not “of us.”
“Their” preferences are alien to ours.
“Ours” is the authentic vox populi.
While it is within the bounds of fair play to have a civil
discussion, where debates among reasonable people are grounded in reality, it
is quite another case to insist that one’s opinions are true simply because…well…one
believes them to be true. “Your plan
cuts down more trees than our plan.
Why? Because it is your plan and
therefore it must lead to bad things!” When one side adopts a “final vocabulary,” as
Richard Rorty might say, it inhibits the ability of such a population to
consider the validity of different perspectives. It is a signifier of a closed mind.
Political language is meant to persuade. Words and numbers are combined to develop the
most compelling argument for (or against) one particular position or cause. Rhetoric is employed to communicate that
argument to an audience. It is hoped
that the language will move that audience to make a decision and take an action. That said, when language is twisted and
debased... or when the “others” are termed “enemies,” that coarsens the discussion
and weakens the foundations of democratic governance.
Imagine if two groups were discussing waffles. One group describes a waffle as “leavened
batter or dough cooked between two plates, patterned to give a characteristic
size, shape and surface impression" (source: Wikipedia). Another group describes them as flattened
disks of steaming evil and those who consume
them are bad, ill-intentioned people. Where
is the ability to find common ground?
How can productive communication occur?
Of course that is what former Speaker of the House Newt
Gingrich and certain GOP operatives did in the 1980s and 1990s when they sought
to turn the word “liberal” into a vicious epithet. Sully the group and make their ideas
unpalatable. In the short term, it might
have given Gingrich and his coterie some victories….but it helped usher in an
era of distrust, of hyper-partisanship, of gridlock and bitterness.
I have no hopes that his legacy will yield in favor of a
newfound spirit of respect and cooperation anytime soon, not in DC. That said, I hope in our corner of the
universe, in Howard County, we can find ways to talk with each other civilly,
and not at each other angrily.
At least we should be able to agree on the definition of a
waffle.
Stay tuned, as more will follow.