People are complex and contradictory. At times, I make practical decisions. In other moments, emotion wins. Usually, some sort of combination of the two drives me towards a conclusion. I can be generous and selfish; selfless and egocentric. Generally speaking, I’m somewhere in the middle of the many extremes that delineate my personality and options.
Politics are far more black and white. Superficially, elections ask us to decide between one option and another. This is often true, even in cases where there are more than two choices. It is more or less impossible to find a platform that reflects who any of us are or how we feel. It is too difficult for a political party -in the end, a reduction of a group’s values and positions- to predict and echo any of us completely.
This contrast, between the enormity of human nature and the reduced reality of politics, creates a tension. We’re trying to stuff a complex and ever-changing person into one side or the other of a largely static dichotomy. Our contradictory and multifaceted natures fit badly in the black and white world of politics. This is the reason we’re unsatisfied with our choices and even cynical when the option we chose celebrates his or her victory. To vote is to be Odysseus confronted with Scylla and Charybdis; we choose the lesser of two evils and are rarely satisfied with the results.
For a powerful few, there is much to be gained by pushing people into a false dichotomy. If a national dialog reaches the point where people have to decide whether you are with us or against us, then that conversation has failed the people and favored an established ruling class. If people invest a black and white option with feelings and passions, then it is likely that -for years- many politicians have preferred short-term victory through divisions rather than the hard work of long-term incremental improvements and open channels of communication. As people fight in the streets -often working-class police versus working-class protesters- a far wealthier few celebrate that the people’s attention is on the division and far from the sources and locations of wealth and power.
Today Spain lost. Years of bad communication between Madrid and Cataluña burst into violence. The terrible and frequent images of darkly clad riot police using sticks and shields to beat older men and women as they tried to vote were seen around the world. Whatever your feelings about Cataluña’s independence, the sight of batons versus ballots quickly distilled centuries of tensions into a worldwide condemnation of Madrid’s actions. While I’m not sure I agree with everything he says -particularly about the Spanish king- Argentine Diego Fonseca nicely summarizes the situation in the following tweets. A nineteenth century call for independence was answered with twentieth-century state violence, which was judged unjust via twenty-first century communications. Here’s hoping twenty-first century democracy can replace reduced false ideals with something closer to our contradictory selves. It feels apparent that many people around the world are not seeing anything close to their voices reflected in our outdated black and white political dialog.
Politics are far more black and white. Superficially, elections ask us to decide between one option and another. This is often true, even in cases where there are more than two choices. It is more or less impossible to find a platform that reflects who any of us are or how we feel. It is too difficult for a political party -in the end, a reduction of a group’s values and positions- to predict and echo any of us completely.
This contrast, between the enormity of human nature and the reduced reality of politics, creates a tension. We’re trying to stuff a complex and ever-changing person into one side or the other of a largely static dichotomy. Our contradictory and multifaceted natures fit badly in the black and white world of politics. This is the reason we’re unsatisfied with our choices and even cynical when the option we chose celebrates his or her victory. To vote is to be Odysseus confronted with Scylla and Charybdis; we choose the lesser of two evils and are rarely satisfied with the results.
For a powerful few, there is much to be gained by pushing people into a false dichotomy. If a national dialog reaches the point where people have to decide whether you are with us or against us, then that conversation has failed the people and favored an established ruling class. If people invest a black and white option with feelings and passions, then it is likely that -for years- many politicians have preferred short-term victory through divisions rather than the hard work of long-term incremental improvements and open channels of communication. As people fight in the streets -often working-class police versus working-class protesters- a far wealthier few celebrate that the people’s attention is on the division and far from the sources and locations of wealth and power.
Today Spain lost. Years of bad communication between Madrid and Cataluña burst into violence. The terrible and frequent images of darkly clad riot police using sticks and shields to beat older men and women as they tried to vote were seen around the world. Whatever your feelings about Cataluña’s independence, the sight of batons versus ballots quickly distilled centuries of tensions into a worldwide condemnation of Madrid’s actions. While I’m not sure I agree with everything he says -particularly about the Spanish king- Argentine Diego Fonseca nicely summarizes the situation in the following tweets. A nineteenth century call for independence was answered with twentieth-century state violence, which was judged unjust via twenty-first century communications. Here’s hoping twenty-first century democracy can replace reduced false ideals with something closer to our contradictory selves. It feels apparent that many people around the world are not seeing anything close to their voices reflected in our outdated black and white political dialog.
