Play-Acting Politics

Almost anyone who spends time studying politics will come to the conclusion that it is serious business. For better or worse, politics deals with fundamental questions such as, “Do human beings deserve liberty?,” “Will property be secured?,” and even, “What is a human being?” These are not simple questions but ones touch at the very heart of the human experience. Abraham Lincoln, who was perhaps the greatest statesman of the past 200 years, understood the necessity of answering political questions correctly. When he argued against Stephen Douglass on the morality of slavery, he was not play-acting. Rather, he was attempting to alert his country to a grave and mortal sin and rouse them to action.

Evidently, not all political questions are as great as the existence of slavery. But this does not change the fact that politics will always be concerned with fundamental issues. It is not merely a game to be played by those who enjoy the exchange of ideas or the feeling of power. In his Politics Aristotle claimed the state aims at the highest good of human life. Such a serious aim should be dealt with by serious people.

Despite the importance of politics, however, our disputes can be mitigated by two important factors; namely, religion and constitutionalism. Religion is essential because it both humbles and elevates us. It humbles us by highlighting our own inadequacies but elevates us by ensuring that our endeavors have meaning and are governed by a supreme moral law. Constitutionalism is also necessary, because it solidifies a country’s fundamental structure and principles into a rigid document.

Despite their importance, these two bulwarks of a free society are under attack. Although they pay it occasional lip-service, the left has practically no respect for the Constitution. They adhere to the maxim of the progressive president, Woodrow Wilson who claimed that “The Constitution was not made to fit us like a straitjacket”… “There were blank pages in it, into which could be written passages that would suit the exigencies of the day.” In other words, Wilson and his current followers believe that they can alter the Constitution to align with their interests. Not only is this arrogant and tyrannical, it eliminates the possibility of political stability. If the structure of our regime is not predetermined, then each generation must force their new vision upon society. This is certainly not a situation in which civilized discourse is likely to occur.

Additionally, in many areas of the country religion is not only seen as a farce, but as something that must be removed from public life. Take the example of the Christian baker in Colorado who refused to bake a cake for a same-sex wedding. Nearly every major left-wing figure was adamantly opposed to his right to religious freedom. Over 200 Democratic members of Congress submitted a brief to the Supreme Court on behalf of the sam-sex couple. Among the supporters were Senate Minority Leader, Chuck Schumer and House Majority Leader, Nancy Pelosi (NBC News). The left no longer adheres to an “agree to disagree” attitude. Their actions demonstrate both a disdain for freedom and rejection of religious values.

When people lament our current polarization and vitriol, they often forget to ask why we are polarized. Or, if they provide an answer, they typically engage in milquetoast virtue-signaling wherein they vaguely point fingers at both sides. While both sides can be wrong, one will almost always be more wrong than the other. When prominent figures take this supposed moral high ground, they forget a fundamental truth; politics is a serious business and people are right to take it seriously. It is not an arena for play-actors or drifters without principles. Politics is a place where fundamental questions of human life are put into practice. While we may be forced to compromise, we should never abandon basic moral truths. Nor should we forget that compromise is only possible under certain conditions.