Dec 18, 2008 Comments
Political Thoughts for Those Inclined to Read Such Things…
Originally published on Facebook and http://www.breakingsilence.org during the previous months outage…
Election day is quickly approaching and everyone wants to know who everyone else is voting for. But most people don’t really want to know who you are going to vote for — instead most seem to have preconceived notions about you and the boxes they think you fit in to. That’s the funny thing about our system — we have a limited number of boxes (two if we’re being honest) and we seem to inherit our stances more than anything else (from family, social groups, etc). Most of the time this is ok with people; it doesn’t seem that many take the time to seriously check up on who and/or what they support, towing the company line — so to speak — instead. It’s certainly easier that way. And it certainly explains all of the distortions, half-truths and outright lies being passed off as absolute truth.
This “box” situation changed for me after the last presidential election. Truth be told — the aftermath of that election made me cynical about our whole political process; I began to question it from the ground up (paying particularly close attention to the boxes I found myself in). From the get go, things I was seeing from elected officials didn’t add up (particularly considering the platforms I thought they had run on). And more important than all of that, the Holy Spirit was convicting me about the positions I thought were important thereby forcing a reevaluation of everything. It was back to the drawing board at this point; conviction required throwing off the (republican) mantle I grew up rooted in; it was time to look at the world through new, Kingdom eyes.
It’s been a really healthy process although not without its ups and downs. A healthy cynicism about the political process is proving to be a boon to Kingdom living for one thing. After all, as a Christian I have citizenship in a new kingdom ruled by values not of this dying world. In addition, the process has also forced me to face some hard truths like the fact that western values aren’t necessarily anything like Kingdom values (including the fact that the modernization and the hyper-individualization thrust on us is quite anti-Kingdom). It’s causing me honestly to see problems through these new eyes I previously mentioned — eyes baptized and anointed by the King of kings; the solutions sometimes become strikingly different than what we are used to expecting (for example — considering letting a non-vote stand as a vote against a corrupt system).
The “strikingly different” part of these solutions resides in the conviction that the Church should represent an alternative Kingdom to the (dying) kingdoms of the world. This Kingdom should be telling an alternative story from what we hear in the press and see lived out before our eyes daily. It’s story should be wholly unlike that of any candidate because this Kingdoms leaders are wholly different. And most important — this alternative Kingdom should offer people something that no earthly power ever can — the liberation and reconciliation of a dying world to its Maker.
As I hope I’ve implied, this new outlook is striking in its penetration. It affects all of my life. Gone is the dualism so common in American churchianity (the separation of life into spheres — most commonly broken down as the so-called religious sphere and public sphere). Replacing it is a faith that informs the entire being. No more distinction can be made between the public and the private, the physical and the spiritual. Gone is the sentiment that I can love a personal enemy but not an enemy of state (for example). More than just a private guarantee of life in heaven, the Gospel has become a flowing river of life bringing heaven down into reality.
I think it’s going to take an example to fully explain what this means to me. One thing this simple truth now makes me is wholly pro-life. Genesis makes it clear that we are all image bearers of God (we bear His Eikon). This separates us from the animals and makes us all special. This is quite important and bares emphasis: it’s not because of innocence or some other earthly notion — it’s the fact that we bare the image of our Maker that makes us special. And that applies to all of us, from the womb to the tomb as some have put it. The New Testament fleshes this out quite a bit in the life of Jesus. One story I specifically think of is the Pharisees confronting Jesus about taxes. They want to trap Him into saying something but He responds to them by saying, “Render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s but render unto God what is God’s.” Jesus uses the same phrasing of Genesis to describe the image on Caesar’s coin and makes the direct comparison of the coins of Caesar (they’re Caesar’s because they are stamped with his image) and humanity (we belong to God alone because we are stamped with HIS image). So yes — give to Caesar the coins if you are playing that game but never forget that you all belong to God alone — He is the author of your life and demands all of who you are. I use this example because it exemplifies the importance of Eikons, human bearers of God’s image, to God. If we are going to label ourselves as being for life we must never forget this.
And so it follows, as a restored Eikon, I can’t help but recognize the intrinsic value that humanity has in the eyes of its maker. And this fosters a commitment to spur Eikons towards restoration (rather than seeing them cracked further). This means I say no to abortion, no to the death penalty, no to war and no to torture. Essentially I must say no to anything that might in the slightest way crack the life of an Eikon anymore than they currently are. Conversely, this means I’ll generally say yes to anything that encourages life and restoration.
Coming to these conclusions makes voting a tricky thing as neither party has completely pro-life policies. On one hand you have a party that won’t take a strong stand against the killing of the unborn and on the other you have a party currently bent on war, torture, the death penalty and other pleasant things like that. Some would have you consider the innocence of each side (ie, abortion vs war, etc). This argument isn’t acceptable as it cedes that some life is more valuable/more important than others (either way you swing it) which I think seizes to be true once we consider everyone to be stamped with the image of God. You also have the problem with defining innocence — it’s highly subjective. What makes the Iraqi child mutilated and killed by our troops or mercenaries any less innocent than one of our own? This mode of thinking (relegating one side as inherently more important than another) only gives in to the anti-Christ spirit ruling the world (it gets us at a very base level to see some life as invaluable, unredeemable, beyond saving, not worth saving, etc). I’m sorry but that’s not a spirit I’m willing to give into and it saddens me that so many do.
As I said, this leaves one in a tricky spot as neither party offers up a wholly pro-life agenda. If this is all I have to consider — I can either give into the evil of one candidate or not vote at all. I don’t think this is all their is to consider though, as it only looks at the surface. I think it is possible to get below the surface and potentially find an overriding ethic of life, in spite of some surface policies. There is a way to navigate the mess that has become apparent the more I pray, meditate and think on what happens on November 4th.
For starters — a serious examination of all the issues must be made. That starts with a serious look at where our country currently is and the direction it would be going, broadly speaking, given any particular candidate. With Bush we’ve witnessed the demise of the Republican party of yore. Replacing it is a hotbed of neo-liberal theory that is rapidly turning our country into one run by the corporate elite and marked by fascism. The extreme unregulated privatization of everything (including traditionally government sectors) is not the way towards national prosperity or security. It’s destroying this nation in fact. Our rights are being increasingly eroded — as a start I can think of the Patriot Act, Military Commissions Act, FISA and numerous other presidential orders and statements as examples of this. Ordinary citizens are now being spied upon without their consent. Some have been disappeared (we like to call it “extraordinary rendition” apparently). At a whim, our administration can now deny you habeas corpus — guaranteed by the constitution — simply by labeling you an enemy combatant. Even worse — torture is endorsed. It begs the immediate question, “Why in our search for justice after 9/11 did we lose site of what we stood for, becoming in the process what we were chasing?” Unfortunately the answer hits a little too closely to home, I think, as it has more to do with our greed as a nation (and less to do with any real search for justice). I mentioned earlier in this paragraph the privatization of previously and historically public sectors. The military/war machine is one such example that I DON’T believe should ever be privatized, yet we did with the ambiguous war on terror. Look no further than the billions of dollars we are funneling into corporations like Haliburton and Blackwater. Blackwater is a mercenary organization, privately owned and operated, with over a billion dollars in defense contracts (such as guarding the embassy in Iraq — wait a second…shouldn’t our military be doing this???). Haliburton/KBR is another company making bank off of our government; wartime profiteering has never been so high. I watched just last night a satirical film about the privatization of everything called “War, Inc”; this exchange from it pretty well sums the situation up quite nicely:
Walken: Every empire is summed up in Rome. The Romans, Hauser, dudes of the human race, torchbearers of culture! You and I are centurions, on a bout to defend civilization against the barbarians!
Brand Hauser: Let’s cut the [crap], Walken! I like killing people as much as the next guy, but I signed up to kill the bad ones! Health clinics, trade unionist, journalists, agricultural co-ops, catholic liberation theologians, impoverished Colombian coffee farmers, these are the barbarians that are brave opponents of civilization? We turned Central America into a [f’n] graveyard! Whoever momentarily interrupts the accumulation of our wealth, we pulverize! I’m just not feeling good about that anymore, sir!
Current economic woes in this country are symptomatic of these (failed) policy decisions as well. In truth — the rampant deregulation went great lengths to create the economic mess we currently find ourselves in. Our middle class is (not so) slowly disappearing. The top 1% in terms of income earn more than the entire bottom 50% (and that number is only continuing to grow). While some might choose to believe that capitalism is the last best hope for our world, capitalism unrestrained and unregulated feeds off our lusts and becomes a monster consuming all in its path; it “pulverizes” any who “interrupts the accumulation of our wealth”. Honestly this is one reason that you see fascism intimately connected to extreme capitalism (just as you see communism connected to extreme cases of socialism) and if you notice, the policies I mention above inch us ever more quickly in that fascist direction. We really can’t forget that the fall of man affects us all; its naive to think in a tainted world we could be free of its pitfalls (and the actions of our administration these past 8 years stepping towards fascism only confirm this). Its also quite irresponsible to do nothing in response.
Now, this isn’t to say socialism is the answer by any means. Markets I think should be as free as possible but checked against the extreme greed and lust of a few. They should be regulated in such a way that prevents the wild speculation and “bubbles” that cause crashes like the ones we’ve experienced these past few months. We could have prevented these problems years ago had our leaders stepped up to the plate but alas, they didn’t (some tried to — Ron Paul predicted this in the late 90’s). And I want to stress this again — traditionally government held “markets” should stay in government hands. War should never, ever be made into a market. Some things were not created to be privatized.
Now, back to socialism for a second — it needs to be clear that it isn’t the answer that anyone with a shot at being elected is proposing. It’s irresponsible and honestly a lie to say so. I had to laugh a few days when reading an interview with the leader of the socialist party in Chicago saying how he was offended that someone would even begin to consider Obama a socialist because it’s just so far from the truth (and McCain admitted this finally a few nights ago on Larry King Live). “Change” though is the answer being proposed by Obama’s camp. And change, at least superficially, sounds nice. The question though is whether or not there is substance in the change.
Honestly, I think there is more substance than a lot of people in the boxes I used to find myself in recognize. For one, Obama’s economic plan from the get go is designed to spur economic growth, not hinder it. Data from the past 60 years show more economic growth under democrat leadership as its designed to spur employment (not hinder) and contribute in real ways to the incomes of the middle/lower classes. The vast majority of folks under Obama’s plan would be seeing tax breaks (as would many, many businesses). And his plan gets flack because it does increase taxes on the wealthiest (to Reagan levels) but it does provide businesses especially breaks to spur economic growth (such as the $3000 tax credit for every new hire over the first couple of years). Here is a good study that compares the two tax plans being proposed: The McCain and Obama Tax Plans for Individuals. The bottom line summary is pretty important. McCain’s plan depends on investors investing in the American economy (historically not a given) and “unprecedented federal spending cuts”, something not at all likely if you look at the rest of McCain’s plans for government. In contrast, Obama’s produces revenue that will cut the deficit while giving tax breaks to taxpayers likely to invest their savings in the American economy, thereby spurring its growth.
The fact remains that money is necessary to support the workings of our government and we need to begin to pay off the massive debts that our unjust war (among other things) has created. “Wealth redistribution” is the attack buzzword right now and honestly it’s getting rather annoying. Wealth redistribution is something that McCain himself is for (until it’s inconvenient to say so):
McCain: “I think it’s to some degree because we feel, obviously, that wealthy people can afford more.” Doctor’s daughter: Aren’t we getting closer and closer to, like, socialism and stuff? McCain: “Here’s what I really believe. When you are, reach a certain level of comfort, there is nothing wrong with paying somewhat more.”
And Colin Powell rightly pointed out in his endorsement of Obama that all taxation as we know it is wealth redistribution. As the current administration and McCain would have it, wealth would be redistributed to the wealthiest of our nation; a corrective to this would not be a bad thing. And so, while not necessarily ideal, I think there is certainly a case to be made for Obama’s plan (especially considering the alternative).
Taxes and the economy though aren’t the sole issues; the buck doesn’t stop with them, so to speak. Health care is something else that is important to consider. I think its tragic that we supposedly live in one of the freest nations but have one of the worst health care systems in the first world. And honestly I find it more tragic that so many people don’t care. McCain’s plan is honestly abysmal. There is no guarantee of coverage for people with pre-existing illnesses. Further — he would remove tax breaks on health care plans choosing instead to give people a credit to go out and get their own (completely privatizing it, I might add). The problem here is that the credit isn’t nearly enough to afford health care in the vast majority of cases. Not only that — there isn’t any space for regulation of any kind. If you have a less-than-perfect health history — good luck! You’ll likely see either sharply increased prices or a rejection at every door. It’s conservatively estimated that 21 million folks will be dropped from their company sponsored health care plans and an additional 47 million will join the ranks of the completely uninsured (currently 46 million). This is truly tragic to consider (and speaks against any ethic of life, honestly).
And there are many other issues that one must consider as well: immigration, defense, energy, environmental concerns, etc. They should all be weighed and considered. This is something I’ve been doing these past few weeks and months. I’ve waffled between coming out and endorsing a candidate, keeping my mouth shut but voting still or choosing instead not to participate in a flawed system. It’s honestly a tough decision.
I know though through my time studying and praying that McCain is not someone I could ever through my vote/endorsement behind. Broadly speaking — he only represents more of the same (as I’ve discussed above). He voted with Bush and his party 90+% of the time and his campaign is filled with the same advisors. Frankly I’m tired of hearing the word “maverick” tossed around because not only is more of the same not what this country needs, there is nothing “mavericky” about it.
I also feel strongly that his campaign has shown everything BUT integrity these past few months. Has there been a single non attack ad? FactCheck is full of rebuttals. Even worse — rampant fear mongering should never be the basis of a campaign. If it is — there is obviously something wrong with the issues you support and you should probably start looking at revising them. It’s honestly despicable to hear cries of “Terrorist!”, “Kill him!” and “Off with his head!” at the republican rallies. The cry of socialism as well is rather hypocritical coming from someone who supported the nationalization/sem-nationalization of a good chunk of our financial institutions and suggested buying failed mortgages from citizens (not to mention having a running mate who likes to spread the wealth in her own state). That last parenthetical brings up another good point: the running mate. She’s already had serious ethic charges brought up against her as governor of Alaska and her record is proving to be the opposite of what she says (on things like earmarks and such). And it’s quite worrisome that her foreign policy experience is summed up by the word “oil” (and that she doesn’t know of strategies such as the “Bush Doctrine”). This choice in running mate alone is causing many conservative republicans to jump ship, so to speak, and get on board with the other side. Andrew Sullivan has been doing a good job of tracking such things on his blog.
Now this may all sound like I’m gearing up for an Obama endorsement. I’ve spent a good chunk of writing time so far confronting the policy of McCain and the republican party. This is primarily because of the ethic of death I see permeating it. And it is really disappointing to see others recognizing this as well and being demonized for it. I have heard one too many disciples of Christ called names for this conviction (or even worse — had their faith completely questioned). I let this writing stand as testimony against that ethic of death and the attitudes of those pushing it onto others. Let it be known though that I’m not truly happy with Obama’s campaign either. I don’t like that the only thing he’ll say outright about abortion is that “no one is pro-abortion”; I think the democrat party could go lengths to build bridges to those morally more conservative by readily identifying the elimination of abortion as a serious agenda item (as quite a few democrats have). Obama just hasn’t though and I’d be much more comfortable with an endorsement had he. Not only that I’m not thrilled about supporting a candidate wanting to feed the military machine. While his foreign policy is certainly more appealing than that of McCain, it still calls for military buildup continued engagement in this ambiguous war on terror. Despite seeing an ethic of life dimly twinkling within the democrat’s party, these two policy choices (among others) are quite bothersome. They do stand in opposition to what I see as “pro-life.” While I haven’t gotten the specific “NO!” I received whilst praying about the McCain campaign I haven’t gotten an enthusiastic “YES!” either (actually silence so far).
I think this silence, at least in part, is because above all I must remember to not take things — my vote — too seriously. If I cast it, it’s simply to lend a voice, to give opinion about direction and really, nothing more. True societal change will never come through politics. It just can’t. Power is structured differently — built on strength, not weakness — on authority, not sacrifice — on security, not love. Political leaders hold completely different values important. And this won’t change until once again our King of kings makes an appearance on the scene, when swords are turned to plowshares, when the nations are smited by His LOGOS and when every knee bows before His throne. Until that time, rather than taking the political situation so seriously, the church is infinitely better off investing her time in being that alternative kingdom that stands in direct opposition to the body politic.
And that is why I write this — not as an endorsement of a single candidate but as a prophetic encouragement to unleash the church upon a desperate generation. The time has passed for us to sit and do nothing. Any one who believes that a vote is the end all/be all fix of social issues needs a reality check: A vote will not change society; as long as you believe that it will, you will fail to be the change you so desperately desire (and I know so many of you want to see this nation changed). This goes for those standing on both sides of the aisle. Abortion is not going to be changed by a vote; the republicans have proven this throughout the years. What might though is taking the time to get your hands dirty — to stand with the unwed teen, the poverty stricken widow, the misguided hipster — to offer assistance whatever it might look like, be it finances for healthcare or offering an adoption or more. And poverty won’t radically disappear with a vote from either direction; what might make a dent though is a Biblically mandated socialism where we all hold everything in common, where generosity is the norm and not the exception and where millions of dollars are funneled into the broken and needy in our communities instead of bigger and better buildings. And the need for huge defense budgets certainly won’t change voting for a candidate; every platform tells us this, across the board. The church though should be a massive movement of peace in this war torn world rather than jumping on board with and selling out to war’s destructive power.
So this is the message that I want you to take as you go out to vote (if you even do — I can certainly understand not wanting to). And remember this well. Neither candidate can offer the world what the Kingdom of heaven does. We err when we mistakenly think that they do. Hold your vote lightly because there is a much more important way to affect society. Obama, McCain, Barr, Nader, Baldwin or any other faceless name that might appear on your ballot will only ever be able to do so much working out of a corrupt system in league with the darkness of the present world. Truly cast a vote for change: involve yourself in Christ’s kingdom wherever you are at.