by CKR
I must admit that I am entering the New Year with a feeling of foreboding. That’s not all I have: I’m very optimistic about my personal situation, and I’m delighted with the way our blog-tank discussion on nuclear policy is going. But conversations with friends and relatives over the holiday indicate that others share my concern.
If only the politics we’re being offered—not just in the United States, but all over the world—met the quality of what individuals are doing! I’ll concentrate on the appalling state of politics in the United States, though, for this post.
We need a future! That’s what the presidential candidates don’t seem to get. It’s not about the nineties or the sixties, but about the next four years and the foundation they will lay for the time after that. We need solutions to all those problems that have been kicked down the road since at least Ronald Reagan’s presidency.
And, that said, we need an overarching view of who we Americans are and a clear enunciation of that view. It’s got to be more than the negative, although a clear understanding that we don’t fall into a panic at terrorist attacks and we don’t torture people would be a start. Also that we believe in the rule of law, not men, and we have an excellent basis in our Constitution.
But that’s just the start. We need confirmation of the good things we’re doing individually and in various groups and a view of extending and expanding those good things into the future. We believe that there is a balance between the capitalistic opportunity to make money and the protection of those who can’t win in that race. We believe that excessive worry about their health and welfare stunts the ability of people to contribute their best to the country. We believe that we can welcome the new without destroying the old.
Yes, I know. That’s not as good as it could be, but that is supposedly why we have a political class: to enunciate our ideals for us. And to live by them.
So here’s a Christian way to campaign: get the dirt out on your opponent, but then say, well, I decided it would be holier not to do that. And, btw, when did we institute a religious requirement for office? I thought the Constitution said something else. Maybe we could spend the time speculating about Mitt Romney’s Mormon underwear on discussing the kind of country we’d like to be.
Or the endless Clintonian triangulation, which seems to be working: many people believe that Hillary shares their values, just as they believed that George Bush was a compassionate conservative who backed the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty.
Or McCain’s apparent principles, which he holds onto longer than some of the other candidates but jettisons when necessary.
Or moving away from the hate involved in so much of the discussion about immigration to a real solution to dealing with underdevelopment in Mexico and its consequences for people who have sought their futures in the United States.
Here’s an attempt at something that might begin to address my concerns, but, despite my respect for some of the people involved, all the politics has taken its toll and I doubt that yet another zillionaire candidate is the solution to our problems.
I do see citizen participation as an important part of what we’ve got to do, so I’m delighted at all the work the participants are putting into our nuclear weapons policy debate. There are new ideas being developed, important background work being done, and support for some of the ideas that are already out there. I’m not saying much about the specifics so far, because everyone else is doing such a good job. We’ve just begun on this; I’m hoping the politicians will take note, but I plan to take more action if they’re too occupied with their version of business as usual.