The Republican handed us an easy one with their attack on Graeme Frost, but things will not always be that easy, especially when they finally come to their senses and head towards moderation. The question will be, how do we win when the other side is not so obviously wrong?
The answer, actually, is we shouldn't always win, not if we want to be the kind of party we want to be. If we wish to be the heroes of the story, not just to ourselves, but to others not of our political persuasion, we have to get beyond pure competitiveness.
This is the first of a series, the underlying theme being politics seen from a perspective of storytelling as we all enjoy it, and the underlying values that get appealled to within those stories. Politics is a part of culture, so understanding what we want and like as a culture in our storytelling can clue us in to what kind of character and techniques we want to bring to our politics.
Heroes. We talked much about them in the wake of 9/11. We talked about their unambiguously heroic behavior, rushing in while everybody else was rushing to get out. Heroes became defined by what they were willing to do while everybody else stood on the sidelines.
But is being a hero all about acting out? Part of being the hero of a story is restraint, refusal to cross certain boundaries. Aragorn refuses to take the One Ring from Frodo. Capt. Miller refuses to kill a Prisoner. In the anime Trigun, the gun-wielding hero Vash adheres to a strict vow against taking lives, even against the most murderously violent villains. In the recent Batman film, the character breaks from those who trained him when he learns they will require him to execute a murderer with his own hands. Superman, of course, despite his great power, doesn't kill his enemies.
Restraint can be heroic. But there's no magic formula for what restraint to exercise, as opposed to what action. It depends on things. One thing is for sure, though: avoidance of wrongdoing is part of the bargain.
The Republicans decided some time back that they were the heroes of the story, or maybe anti-heroes, characters who do things that don't fight societies typical picture of heroism, but who, by virtue of their recognition of what right and wrong, and their willingness to do what it takes to set things right, or at least survive what is so wrong with the world. While such sensibilities can be of use in times of change, they can become a liability when one decides that one's goals justify any means to attain them.
If we are really to be the good guys, we must not fool ourselves into believing that just any kind of behavior is appropriate. We must also realize that what we say and how we say it reflects on people's sense of our character, and after a certain point, on that actual character. For many of us, our defining experiences of alienation from those on the Right has been our experience of their words. We should not kid ourselves that what we say cannot similarly reflect poorly upon ourselves. Additionally, our ability to rebuke such vitriol with credibility depends on our ability to hold our tongue when the acid begins to rise in our voice.
These are things we must do in substance, not merely display in appearance. Reality creates image much more effortlessly than imagination does. acknowledgement of reality also helps when we send messages about ourselves. Perfection is the virtue of the fictional, when it comes to human beings, and people are much kinder on those who make mistakes when they acknowledge their real fallibility, and quickly get to work dealing with their problems.
The Right have quite unwillingly become villains on the national stage. This is caused not merely by their excess, but also by their refusal to curb it, to moderate their behavior.
We should take note that this has not only set them back politically election-wise, but also in terms of the cooperation they can gain in seeing their agenda followed.