Cal Jacobson’s Blog

Politics is poison. There, I’ve said it.

There was a time in my life — not too long ago — that I considered myself a somewhat politically savvy creature.  I followed the ebb and flow of politicians and their crusades.  I chose a side, reveled in its victories and seethed when the opposition gloated in theirs.

Gradually, however, I began to realize that being a partisan did absolutely nothing for me personally.   At first glance it may seem that being political is much like following a sport — say, football.   Both politics and football have their stars and losers, but that’s about as far as it goes.

See, if you’re a Pittsburgh fan you’re obviously going to root for the Steelers in any game they play.  Assuming that you’re a reasonable human being, you’ll get frustrated whenever the other team scores or a penalty is called in their favor…but you won’t let it truly agitate you.  If the other team is good, you might even grudgingly appreciate a particular play or strategy.

Now if the Steelers are playing their longtime rivals, the Cleveland Browns, you might be less appreciative of the Browns’ skill.  If a smack-talking Cleveland player gets pummeled on a play and has to be helped off of the field, you might even feel a bit of satisfaction.  If the Steelers win the game, then all is right with the world since obviously they are the better team; if the Browns win then it is obviously due to bad calls.  All your fellow fans will reinforce your belief…and maybe even the Baltimore and Jacksonville fans at the office.

One of the problems I have with politics — at least current American politics — is that there are only two teams.  Pittsburgh is always playing Cleveland.  In the Super Bowl.  And the game never ends.  Worst of all, at some point the teams stopped caring about playing a good game and are simply going through the motions so at some point the various players can get off of the field and cash their checks.  In the stands, half of the fans are on your side and half hate your guts simply because you’re wearing the wrong colors.

This is how I see politics today.  Rooting for one side or another is pointless since all the football players just want their paycheck and don’t give a crap about you.  You paid $150 per ticket plus another $100 on concessions in freezing cold weather and you want to watch some real competition?  Too bad!

Currently in the United States both major political parties have the same two goals:

1. Maintain their current level of power, and
2. Achieve more power, presumably at the expense of the other party

Now if you’re thinking to yourself “say, I didn’t see anything in there about representing the people of this country and finding optimum solutions to problems facing the nation”, we’re probably on the same sheet of music.  If you didn’t think that, then you should be, otherwise you’ve fallen victim to the propoganda of one of the two sides.

Consider:

• Democrats are evil socialists who wish to destroy traditional values and this country.
• Republicans are evil warmongers who wish to kill the homeless and become rich off the backs of the poor.
• Oceania has always been at war with Eurasia.
• War is Peace; Freedom is Slavery; Ignorance is Strength.

Two of those bullet points are from George Orwell’s 1984.  Two are the underlying points espoused by Fox News, MSNBC, Sean Hannity, Keith Obermann and their ilk.  All are absurd and all are designed to influence the actions of a group of people.  No, I am not claiming that there is a conspiracy by one group or another — I actually think there’s more of a flocking mechanism at work here — but the end goal is for you to hate a particular group of people.

Yes, hate.  Hate makes you stupid; it shuts down the rational part of your brain that might allow you to consider other possibilities.  Hate is a strong, privative emotion that can easily override any kind of nagging feeling in your gut that something is amiss.  Hate has worked very, very well in the past as a means to motivate a population to do (or not do) things that would normally run counter to its character.

When I was closely following politics, hate was an emotion that I would sometimes feel.  It fed an irrational belief that the other side was not only wrong, but so wrong they weren’t even worth listening to.  This was reinforced by arguments I would hear in the media and read on the Internet by opposing partisans saying that my point of view was wrong and unworthy of a moment’s consideration.

Holy crap, that’s not an enlightened position.  The simple explanation — the head-in-the-sand explanation — is “hey, we knew they were wrong and they’re obviously wrong on this.  It changes nothing!”  Problem is, it flies in the face of what I’m trying to teach my kids: look around you, find out all you can, think for yourself.  If I’m telling my 7-year-old not to believe everything he sees on TV because the people who make commercials sometimes bend the truth or flat-out lie, why am I so eager to believe what I see on television eight hours and 12 channels later?

The answer is that both sides are wrong: not completely wrong, but wrong enough that nothing they say or do should be taken without a grain of salt — if not a huge-ass salt lick.  Buying into the propaganda of either side is little better than taking up smoking: neither will make you healthier and both will end up costing you a lot in the long run.  Worse, you end up supporting the same bad habit in other people: smokers encourage other smokers to take smoke breaks, partisans encourage other partisans (either by validating or enraging them) by ignoring one side’s faults and pimping their side’s supposed virtues.

Partisanship and any kind of emotional attachment to politics is intellectual laziness, pure and simple. I’ve been guilty of it, and even nowadays I’ll catch myself falling into that trap.  As I write this the United States is nearing the end of yet another long and content-free political season.  Two candidates and their running mates have made every attempt to infiltrate every American home and bombard every citizen of voting age every minute of the day with every slogan and talking point that has little if anything to do with the real issues at hand.

So you may be tempted to ask me which one I’m voting for.

My answer: none of your business.

I don’t say that to be snotty or condescending.  I say that for two reasons:

1. First and foremost, if my choice isn’t your choice, you will likely have a negative reaction towards me simply due to how you’ve been conditioned (see above).  This isn’t weakness on your part: if our roles were reversed the same would be true.  This is the Pavlovian reaction that partisans want out of us, which has been reinforced by their various allies in the media.
2. Secondly, my choice is based not on any specific talking point or slogan or platform: it is based upon which of the two candidates is the least authoritarian….and believe me, that’s not an easy choice.  I may even make the wrong choice.  Maybe there is no right choice.

Because this election (and many before it) isn’t about Republicans versus Democrats or Progressives (or Liberals, if you’d prefer) versus Conservatives or Right versus Left.  It is about authoritarian versus libertarian, and unfortunately the race is neck-and-neck between authoritarian candidates.

When I say “libertarian” I don’t mean big-L Libertarian Party either — while they might appear more palletable than either of the two major parties, they neither have the power to challenge them (due to how the Electoral College operates) nor would they eventually be any different than the Democrats or Republicans if they came to power.  The new boss would be the same as the old boss.

No, I mean small-l libertarian: personal liberty over a single, controlling authority.  Personally, I think less government is better to a point — anarchy is not a solution, it is the wet dream of adolescents enamored with Max Max movies.  I expect to pay taxes so a government can support national defense, mediate differences between states of the Union, and generally stay the hell out of how I run my business if it has not detrimental impact on anybody else.  First and foremost, I should be responsible for my actions and welfare…as should everybody else be responsible for theirs.  Government assistance should be limited to extraordinary circumstances such as natural or man-made disasters and even then simply to establish the basics of food, water, shelter — not to ensure that everybody gets a replacement television.

I’m arrogant enough to think that this is a reasonable expectation.  Of course the devil’s in the details, but in my opinion our current government is a far cry from the one I’ve described.  Our government is a lumbering behemoth, spurred on by riders plauged with attention deficit disorder and a crackhead-like attraction to attention and money.  They stay at the reins of power thanks to the bread and circuses of pork-laden bills and finger-pointing as well as widespread voter apathy.

How does one change the system?  Is it to vote for the candidate that most loudly proclaims their independence from the status quo?  No — both are doing that now (and their successors shall do the same in the future) and it simply enables you to be sucked back into the partisan game.

In my opinion, the type of positive change that needs to take place will be fostered only when voters recognize the following:

1. Political parties serve themselves, not the people
2. Power lies in an educated populace, not their representatives
3. Responsibility and power go hand-in-hand, and when you surrender one to the government, it gets the other as well.

If taken to heart, the first eliminates party-line voting and the complacency (among the elected and electorate) that goes along with it.  The second would destroy the presumption among politicians that style over substance will win elections.  The third would kill the entitlement mentality endorsed by big-government proponents.  None of this will take place, however, without the realization that politics is poison — as I started this rambling diatribe — and that the antidote isn’t a particular party but rational thought and a divorce from emotion.

How does that take place?  Stop listening to the professional politicians, talking heads and poll-watchers and listen more to your friends and especially people whom you might not agree with.  If you’ve found anything valuable in what I’ve written, pass it on — even better, do it in your own words.  Passing on a link to this page is as trivial and unsubstantial as a chain letter or spam; making the case yourself to the people you know carries far more weight.

If you don’t agree with me, I challenge you to present a better alternative.  If you can do so honestly, I’ll listen.  If you can do it without using partisan arguments as a crutch, I’ll seriously consider it.  If you can talk to me as a responsible adult and a peer, there’s a good chance you’ll not only get my support, but the support of a lot of people.

People generally don’t act when they think things are all right, or even mostly okay.   It’s only when things are about to go horribly wrong — or are in the process of going horribly wrong — that most folks sit up, take notice, and start to take action.

That time is now. Politics as it exists today is a slow-moving but deadly poison, dividing this country for the sole purpose of empowering a few.  It is not confined to a particular political party — it is a tool of both parties.  The change that most Americans demand will not come until this illusion is shattered.