Monday, August 07, 2006

The Thin Line

America, it seems, is trying to walk a very narrow line - the narrowest line I can ever remember. When the world was a less complicated place, it seemed that the line was quite large and that it could accommodate a great number of people. The kooks and the fringe groups were there on both sides - conspiracy theorists, and hippies, and neo-Nazi's and KKK members. The vast majority of Americans walked together up this wide path, free to think and do as they pleased without really offending everyone. Sure, they didn't always get along and they often had differences of opinion. But after every battle fought in the Supreme Court and every new congressional law passed, the combatants shook hands, dusted themselves off, and then prepared to fight the next battle. Slowly, however, that broad line in the center, that consensus of opinion has been eroding and the fringe groups have been gaining strength.

In many ways I blame the group that I'd most like to call myself a member - the Christian majority. It's not so much that they are a real fringe group - they're mainly only mildly fringe - its that they have shown the other groups the way. Using political motivation and lobbying, they have gone from fringe support to majority without ever compromising their polarizing message. Using local elections to build their power base and then selling that power base to the politician whose views most match their own, they have not only carried state and national elections, they have even elected a President and changed the shape of world politics.

In history there have been many situations where a fringe group has gained national power and then world importance. Two spring to mind. The National Socialist party in 1930's Germany and the Bolsheviks in 1917 Russia. This is not to cast aspersions on the Christian majority, but to point out the fact that when a fringe group has control of a nation, bad things usually happen.

The reason is quite simple. A fringe group is a vocal group that speaks for a minority of people's opinions. They have a set agenda and that agenda does not coincide with the opinions of the majority. As the fringe group gains power, however, the majority's power diminishes allowing the fringe group's opinions to dominate the majority and enforcing a way of life or a set of laws that most people don't agree with or want. The once broad path where most people walked shrinks in size until the majority is forced to either choose a side upon which to fall or try to walk the increasingly narrower path without having their side chosen for them.

Once you fall on one side, of course, you are lumped in with everyone on that side. In America, if you are against the Iraq war, you are lumped in with everyone in favor of gay marriage, legalized marijuana, and a whole assortment of other social taboos. That this is not the case or not fair is not the point. On the other side, if you are for the Iraq war, you are lumped in with all the gun-toting, NASCAR loving, price gouging, abortion hating, gay bashing, people who protest at the funeral of a Senator's son because he died in Iraq. Also an ugly picture, also not completely fair or accurate, but also not the point. This is how polarized this nation has become. This is how thin the line has become.

Think of this thin line as a no-man's land in between two great armies. Historically, this buffer zone has been an important part of keeping the peace. In the past, when this no-man's land has disappeared and the sides became so polarized that the choices were narrowed to just two, war and conflict has erupted. I.E. Slaves or no slaves = Civil War. This is the path this country is treading very quickly. This is the inevitable outcome of this polarization.

We are not there yet. And there are signs that perhaps this nation might recover from this deep division. But then there are signs that we are entrenched in our ways and can not change. A poll released over the weekend, for instance, shows that half the nation believes that there are now or were WMD's in Iraq at the start of the 2nd Gulf War despite overwhelming evidence that this is not the case. This is an increase in supporters of this view since the previous poll. This increase is not based on any new evidence nor any new conspiracy theories, but merely on the basis of the belief that "their side" can't be wrong and that the WMD's must have been there or we would have never invaded Iraq. This is a terrible day in U.S. History if people have stopped analyzing the evidence and forming their own opinions, and have decided that the truth can be determined by which side is more to their liking. From that vantage point, we are only a short fall to the opening salvoes of a second American Revolution.

3 comments:

Marcel said...

That's what I was afraid of. Great post, Will. Thanks for affirming one of my struggles as a moderate conservative with occasional swing voting tendencies that, basically, I'm in no man's land in my Fox-News-watching, Rush Linbaugh-listening, post-911-Bush-bandwagon-riding extended family. I have a brother-in-law in Idaho who "subscribes" to the increasinly theocratic Bush agenda regardless of the cost. It's the team he roots for and he's a die-hard fan. I think what you point out so eloquently is the reason why there's a growing number of independents running to the polls every four years. Frankly, I'm tired of people blatantly ignoring the evidence to follow a viewpoint.

Andy said...

You know, I can understand the idea of pushing towards a Christian worldview within the realm of the American political system, and as a general rule I agree it is the right thing to do, but my single biggest problem is this: power corrupts.

Matthew 23:2-4: 2"The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat. 3So you must obey them and do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach. 4They tie up heavy loads and put them on men's shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to lift a finger to move them.

That is the problem I have with the so-called Christian right, as well as with the vocal Left as we see here in the Bay Area. Neither is willing to compromise its position, both are highly judgmental, and they simply react to what the other does, becoming even more entrenched in their own position.

As I've gone round and round over at my site, my issue is that if we are trying to build God's church in the United States, the Christian right have gone about it all wrong. The battle for the hearts of those not yet saved must occur ONE-ON-ONE, not through a blanket law that prohibits a particular type of activity.

Off my soapbox for now.

Anonymous said...

I think people realize the damage conservative wing-nuts have done to the country, and the political pendulum is already swinging back to the center. My worry is that we'll overshoot, and liberal wing-nuts will end up making a mess.

Some people become so wrapped up in the groups they belong to, that even when they see the group going down the wrong path, they can't bring themselves to say anything. To criticize the group you strongly identify with is like criticizing yourself. It takes a certain amount of self-confidence to say you're wrong, and alot of people can't bring themselves to do it.

I was a Democrat up until a couple years ago. Even thought I could see Democrats screwing-up Sacramento, I couldn't bring myself to vote against them, because I didn't want to give an inch to Republicans. I got so angry at myself for voting for Gray Davis during the recall (when Arnold became governor), I went out and re-registed as an Independent. It's very liberating to be able to vote my conscience, and not be held back by party affiliation.

I was watching Newt Gingrich on tv the other day, and he was saying that the country is 20% hard-core Democrat, 20% hard-core Republican, and 60% disgusted. I agree.