PurplePolitik
October 15,2006

"Whenever one looks in the world of human organization, collective responsibility brings a lowering of moral standards."
-Freeman Dyson

Multiple studies confirm the obvious. At our most basic level, humans crave identification with a group. However, this group identification also increases our tolerance of bigotry, injustice, and overall irrational behavior.

Examples of this danger abound. Otherwise good Germans rationalized Nazism; most Jonestown residents believed they were following the will of God.

PurpleThinkers fear our current political leaders are preparing the American flock for a lethal dose of Flavor Aid. Our senses are dulled and we are satisfied only when political philosophy can be compartmentalized into a 30-second sound bite. Campaigns for issues and candidates succeed by discrediting the opposition first and furthering ideas second. The two-party system, aided by poor campaign finance laws, rewards polarization and punishes cooperation, compromise, and the common good.

The irony is that this behavior often damages the long-term success of a desired philosophy. For example,

Christianity is a noble endeavor, but the Christian Right is threatening the freedom of religion in America.

Diversity strengthens democracy, but multiculturalism promotes division and conflict.

The war on terror is necessary, but “with us or against us” forces willing allies to become adversaries.

Civil rights laws are important, but minimum wage legislation, tax law, and welfare reform argued as class or racial issues divides us and ultimately disenfranchises those needing genuine advocacy.

In the study of communication ethics, Aristotle characterized persuasive elements as ethos (character of the speaker), pathos (emotional appeal), and logos (logical argument).

Even Aristotle understood that an overuse of pathos was highly unethical. And as the study linked above confirms, group identification is a deeply rooted emotional response. To use this visceral response mechanism for political gain endangers us all.

We cannot allow the media and political parties to frame all current events as a reason to trust or distrust an entire group of people. The Foley debacle should not be a referendum on all Republicans or conservatives. Likewise, cyclical high interest rates should not be a referendum on all Carter-era economic policy.

There are steps we can take now to avoid even further damage.

1) Dramatically decrease the size of the federal government.

In the constitution, anything not an explicit federal power is to be left to the states. Complicated issues such as education and health care were never meant to be federal concerns. Nationalizing these issues requires them to be oversimplified, genericized, and the purview of distant political groups that polarize the debate. In addition, when multiple states enact separate solutions to common societal problems, the media cannot oversimplify the debate and the result is a true marketplace of ideas.

2) Deregulate political speech and party protections.

Republicans and Democrats are given exclusive rights to debate and committee memberships in federal and most state governments. It should be illegal to institutionalize the two-party system in government procedures. This includes criminalizing collusion of candidates for the purpose of limiting third-party voices in debate.

3) Diversify foreign policy.

The aims of Saddam, Ahmedinejad and Jong-il were very different. It served no useful purpose to designate an “axis of evil” where one never existed. This statement allowed the Republicans to paint Democrats as weak if they did not agree with every last White House policy decision. Likewise, the war on terror must recognize that Hamas, Hezbollah, the Taliban, and Iraq’s Sunnis and Shiites all are very different groups with different histories and motivations. Islamic-fascism is a real threat, but one that is empowered by painting all extremists with the same wide brush.

Groups are necessary, but downright dangerous as a political tool. We must resist the temptation to oversimplify, compartmentalize, or otherwise abdicate our decision-making to a group.

|

 

Home|epinion|Purple People Eater

Feedback@PurpleThink.com

©2006 PurpleThink.com