My Republican Dad (You Heard Me Right Redux)
Mon Feb 14, 2005 at 04:12:33 PM PDT
So, I read
this amazing diary entry and thought to myself, "Yes, this captures how bad things are," and then I thought (hopefully), "Maybe this is what would cue my father into how the Republicans work." I'd describe my father as a thoughtful, very well-educated person, willing to debate, but who also will use cheap rhetorical outs when he's losing an argument (as in "we need more evidence," "differences in opinion are what makes the world go round," "both parties cheat," etc.).
I still am not ready to conclude, though, that my father would support the Republicans like he does if he understood what they were. So, I wrote this e-mail (below) to my father after reading Chris Bowers' diary. Beyond my personal situation--which I know many folks on Kos can relate to--this discussion is obviously part of a bigger question: How do we show people how damaging this administration is? Is there a point at which it doesn't make sense to try to convince people?
(continued below fold)
And two more related questions: Is the confrontational style I take in this e-mail--calling a spade a spade, not backing down--the stance that we as Democrats (and as people who love this country) are morally obliged to take? I think so. Have we been "derelict" in not confronting these attitudes long ago? Yes I say, though better late than never.
So I thought I'd "vet" this with Kos before firing it off. The e-mail follows:
Dad: I thought this [link to Chris Bowers' diary entry] did a good job of showing how immoral and shameless the Republican party has become
As I started reading this--on a Democratic-friendly web site--I got sick to my stomach, thought this guy was nuts, way beyond the line, an embarassment to Democrats. If I thought a Democrat was loathsome as I read him saying these things surely the same goes for a Republican? Of course this writer was merely showing what it sounds like when a Democrat describes Republicans as Republicans regularly describe Democrats. (Make sure you look at the links.)
I know that what I say is confrontational, but first think about (a) how the media would react if Democrats were as hateful and dishonest towards Republicans as Republicans are toward Democrats, (b) how it has become the norm--and thus not challenged--to describe Democrats as less than human, less than American, and (c) the fact that what I'm saying is a response to a constant, shameless, hypocritical, and baseless attack on who I am.
A common trick of bullies is to attack people unfairly and then call the people they first attacked "aggressive" when attention is drawn to the mendacity of the bullies' actions. Who's in the wrong here: The person who attacked or the person who makes a so-called scene by calling attention to the attack? Who should we as a society condemn? And who is being confrontational, the attacker or the one who exposes the attack?
You can say that this isn't every Republican, but if the leaders of the party had a problem with this behavior they could easily make them stop. And they don't--perhaps because the current Republican party is founded on an overwhelming willingness to sacrifice truth in the service of political gain.
You could say that both parties do things like this, but that's the same old same old, misleading rhetoric designed to hide the truth, like saying that someone who speeds is the same as someone who robs a bank, like saying that someone who is lazy at work one day is the same as someone who burns down the office.
How much moral space has to exist between the two parties before it becomes undeniable that one party is corrupt and the other merely (and inevitably) fallible? Does the fact that all of us will behave imperfectly make all wrong actions acceptable and equivalent? This is the logic you continually fall back on when you speak about politics. Are you comfortable with that?
How much should we sacrifice, how many bad decisions should we make based on arguments that by even the most generous standards are totally flawed? How can a political party do any good when it operates like this? What kind of world will such a political party create? Maybe one could support such a party if it benefitted them personally, but why should anyone respect such people?
I said that this is the strategy of bullies--and the only way to counter this behavior is to assert in no uncertain terms that this behavior does not befit the citizens of a democracy, that this behavior may be tolerable in children, but that in adults it deserves only scorn and pity.
Permalink | 27 comments