I usually try to follow a policy of "positive neutrality" on social media - no political statements, rarely something religious. I try to stick to posting photos of the kids. I've told my kids to follow this policy, also; it's my version of "if you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all." I also remind them not to post something that might intentionally make someone else feel left out or hurt.
But not everyone agrees with this kind of approach towards social media use. I'm perhaps in the minority, although I have never felt like I have had to unfriend any of my friends or family because what they said seemed hurtful, and I don't think this is because they all agree on everything, but rather because they may talk about their own views but don't cross the line to condemn people who have different perspectives.. I have "helped" my kids unfollow some people from their Instragram accounts, however, for inappropriate comments or photos.
After this election, I deleted a few of
their friends - this time they showed me the posts filled with four letter words and lots of name calling.
I can understand having a strong reaction to this surprising election and the whole unbelievable campaign process. For a week after the election, I obsessively read news reports, essays, editorials, and yes, Facebook posts after a brief self-imposed hiatus. Like everyone else in the world, I was surprised and dismayed Trump won, but I was also surprised and dismayed at the vehement response to his win. For days, I have had a hard time focusing on other responsibilities while trying to make sense of both the angry protesters and the angry winners, in addition to my own thoughts and theories about the election. I started more than once trying to write some sort of meaningful statement, but after a week, stating my own position, which I can't quite nail down, doesn't feel urgent or necessary anymore. The more I read the more I think to myself, why waste more ink or internet space? Besides the dishes and laundry still need to be done.
But I can't stop thinking about it. So as a kind of exorcism of ideas, not as an apology or an attack, here is my contribution to all the blather about the election.
On Tuesday morning, my husband left for work with a comment about having the first female commander in chief on the morrow, not because he voted for Hillary (or Trump), but because, like most people, he thought her victory was inevitable. I questioned his certainty, not because I was any less certain, but just to be contrarian and because everything about Trump had been unpredictable. That night when I came home from track practice with my daughter, my husband was glued to the TV, despite our bad antenna reception. We couldn't pull ourselves away. The 12 year old, still doing homework, started calculating how the election might fall out based on the number of electoral college votes left. I started to tell him to finish his homework, but then realized he was doing math and civics all at once. We finally went to bed with a mix of surprise and dread of impending results. All we knew for sure was that our write-in candidate didn't win!
My stomach was sinking and my head was spinning (partly because I was fighting off some kind of minimal flu) as I went to bed with the realization that such an unpredictable person could be elected. I had no love for either candidate. Neither represented my views or preferences. I mostly felt disenfranchised, unrepresented, and disgusted by the entire debacle.
Background story: People I love and trust have had good reasons for holding very different political views. One set of my grandparents were Democrats from the era when Democrats supported labor unions and the working class. To them, the Republicans were the party of the rich who wanted to avoid paying taxes. They believed in social supports for the poor because of their Christian belief that they were their brother's keeper.
My other grandparents were Republicans. My grandfather was a conservative of the Russell Kirk variety. He opposed hand-outs in preference to economic stimulus in a free market economy. Communism was still a real threat to him. He believed in local control of education, freedom of religion, and the right to bear arms. He couldn't stand the Clintons the first time around.
Since I have very little memory of Jimmy Carter's presidency, my formative experience of the Republican party was Ronald Reagan and of the Democratic party was Bill Clinton. Reagan was a gentleman; Clinton was not, as the whole Lewinsky scandal revealed, although he could pretend to be one. Solidifying my political leanings to the right as a young adult were the issues of abortion (I wonder how much of the recent political rancor can be traced to when tax payer dollars started going to fund abortions?) and bioethical issues like euthanasia, cloning, and stem cell research. Readings on subsidiarity and market economies also led me to support the party that favored decentralized political power. I worked a couple of summers during college for the public relations department of the Indianapolis mayor's office and got some insight into how unglamorous politics could be, but also how local government could have a direct effect on people's lives. (I helped do research and interviews for
this book.)
Flash forward: In between the development of reactionary politics, divisive rhetoric, and Tea Party economics, I felt less and less attached to the Republican party. A few of the candidates for the primaries seemed interesting, but I admit that I did not participate in the primary elections. I initially thought Trump was encouraged to run by an alliance with Hillary formed to weaken and defeat the Republican party. When he actually won the Republican nomination, I kept hoping the convention would do something miraculous and choose another candidate, or that he would somehow disqualify himself - maybe by getting in trouble with the law with this Trump University business or something. I believed the polls that showed him trailing. His hateful rhetoric, his lack of credibility, and his rejection of his own party led me to believe he wouldn't follow the party policies, and I assumed most people shared my assumption.
The press did a great job of making it seem that Trump supporters were all small town uneducated people or poor urban white people who lacked an education with articles like
this one and
this one. But surprisingly perhaps, a number of people voted for Trump who don't fit this stereotyped demographic. People of all education levels, ethnicities, genders, religious beliefs, and sexuality (limited numbers perhaps, but still) voted for him. But the polls didn't reflect this because apparently a significant number of people were afraid to admit they supported Trump - or, as was the case for many people, didn't approve of Trump's negative characteristics and hateful words, but supported the Republican party or supported anyone who was against Clinton. (Is she the woman to hold up to our daughters as an exemplary first woman president?) Perhaps they were afraid of being associated with the underbelly of Trump supporters. Perhaps they hoped he might improve the economy or held onto hope that he will be pro-life, however slim that hope might be. Certainly not everyone and probably not even the majority of the people who voted for Trump did so because they are homophobic, xenophobic, mysogonistic racists, but they were afraid of being slandered because of their vote. And the reaction of the masses out protesting, spray painting hateful graffiti, smashing cars, damaging property and beating people up confirms that their fear is justified, just as much as the fears of those who have been harrassed for their race, religion, sexuality, or gender.
As I tried to imagine why someone might have voted for Trump, I also thought of many military members in this community who associate Clinton as part of the state department with responsibility for the death of their friends. A few weeks ago, the town lined the street for the funeral procession of an EOD member who was killed by a roadside bomb on a mission in Mosul. And this was just a few months after the funeral of another community member,
Charles Keating, a SEAL who was killed while working with Iraqi forces to combat ISIS, a mission that was not typical of SEAL duties and to which this team was sent without proper reinforcements or protective gear. In fact, Keating and his fiancee were quietly married before their planned wedding because he had an intimation that something might go wrong. The rise and expansion of ISIS has gone unchecked by the Obama administration - which surely lost Clinton some votes.
The people from those above mentioned articles and others in their position, however uneducated they may be, also have a legitimate concern about their livelihoods. They are suffering, too, and their concerns often go unnoticed or belittled by people who live on the coasts.
It may be hard to measure, but it seems to me that the hate on either side is about equal.
Anger on both sides of this campaign has been inevitable because both candidates are reprehensible, but I have also been dismayed by the fearmongering and name calling in the name of "love." Unfortunately, much of the hate is directed not just toward the candidates as it has been in the past, but to anyone who, perhaps reluctantly, voted for either of them. I liked what
Amy Welborn wrote about how people don't start protests or call each other names over their preferences in the city commissioner races, even though politics on the local level are more immediate. (Athough I will say, the mayoral and school board races here were hotly contested...)
As Welborn points out, people have made an idol out of politics. The strong reaction against the election of the George W. Bush was a indication of how personally people identify with their political party and their candidate, and how they despise those who disagree, but now that reaction has become even more violent. Was it because no one expected this outcome? Or because a rejection of Clinton seems to be for many people a rejection of their identity? Do people really believe that Trump is going to snap his fingers and deport everyone from a foreign country, take away everyone's insurance, and end common core? I'm skeptical about everything he says. And I, perhaps unwisely, trust in the system of checks and balances.
If Trump doesn't get impeached in the next four years, it's likely that the Democratic party will come on strong in the next election. In fact, this election might be the best thing that has happened to the Democratic party. Next time around, they can leave the Clintons out and raise up a new candidate who better represents their ideals.
On the other hand, the hypocrisy of those who claim to be about love while hating anyone who disagrees with the way to best administer a democratic society and of those who want to silence others and use protests to cause damage with no real goal in mind may just cause the coalescence of a new party, hopefully a more centrist party.
What bothers me as much as anything is the misuse of the word love. Protest, post on social media, boycott, etc., but if you do violence in the name of love, violence is done to love. And it seems hypocritical to have criticized a candidate for running a campaign based on fear, but then to turn around promote fear of everyone else
Perhaps the violence was done a long time ago. Love requires self sacrifice, some willingness to travel through darkness together, some self denial for the good of the other. A willingness to stay put, to be loyal, to be interested in the other despite differences. It requires faith in the goodness of humanity and hope in the future. It requires being able to talk to your neighbor face to face despite differences in race, religion, gender, ethnicity, sexuality, or political party. It requires a willingness to allow other people their freedom to be different. Neither party has the monopoly on that virtue.
It's a good thing Thanksgiving is right around the corner to test everyone's ability to sit down and dine with people who disagree with each other's ideas but can still love each other as persons, as individuals in need of communion.
