Tuesday October 12, 2004 at 2:35 PM
At the Polls :: Democracy v. Capitalism
Appearing in American Culture & Politics
With America a scant three weeks away from its fate with electoral destiny, there is certainly no shortage of opinion, analysis, and spin as to what the candidates mean, what the candidates would do, and who the candidates are. It should come as no surprise then, given the unrelenting division in our nation, that virtually everyone in the process is working overtime to succinctly articulate the differences between Senator Kerry and President Bush.
Dissected to a degree heretofore unknown in American politics, the candidates are alternatively described as stubborn or resolute, indecisive or nuanced, independent or isolationist, inclusive or weak, plain-spoken or simple-minded, rambling or thoughtful. Unfortunately, with the notable exception of David Brooks’ persistent but unsatisfying attempts, what’s largely absent from the ceaseless rhetoric is an intelligent, comprehensive, and useful discussion of the underlying philosophies fueling the candidates positions.
Although the President’s supporters are quick to point to their candidate’s “family values” and “religious convictions”, on closer inspection its obvious to even the most pedestrian observers that the President’s actions and attitudes stand in stark contrast to the established traditions of Christianity. You don’t have to look very hard to realize that the true Christian majority is just as divided, outraged, and confused as the rest of us.
To the detriment of us all, this Administration has compiled a record of actions, whether in terms of the economy, healthcare, the environment, international relations, gun control, taxation, foreign aid or dozens of other issues, that stands in stark contrast to traditional Christian values. In a manner both bold and alarming for its unadulterated cynicism, the President and his attendant Radcons routinely use the religious rhetoric as a Trojan Horse to secure the support, loyalty, and ultimate obedience of the Christian Right.
But even if the President was operating in a manner consistent with the traditional moorings of Christianity, the religious lens is hardly useful as a tool for comparing him to Senator Kerry since Senator Kerry’s agenda of multi-lateralism, cooperation, and environmental responsibility can hardly be described as anti-Christian.
The Religious Right may have anointed President Bush their man, but the issues on which they’ve based such support — abortion, same sex marriage, and abstinence — is hardly representative of the most important or urgent issues facing our nation or our world.
Rather than a battle between a secular and a religious vision, the conclusion I’ve arrived at after more listening, reading, and digesting than I care to admit, is that we’re smack dab in the middle of a large-scale, high-stakes battle between the two fundamental and competing philosophies of American society: Democracy and Capitalism.
Embedded in the very fabric of our history and national character, the U.S. itself is a sort of bold experiment between these two grand modes of organization and action. In recent history this battle has played itself out in the form of robber barons versus labor unions, Great Depressions versus New Deals, a Great Society versus Reaganomics, industrial pollution versus the Environmental Protection Agency, and even the military-industrial complex versus compulsory military service.
In essence, a never-ending struggle to use the inherent stability and legitimacy of Democratic institutions to anticipate and constrain the more dangerous consequences and inevitable excesses of unfettered Capitalism.
It’s a contrast that takes on many forms and encompasses many different conflicts but is so common that it virtually escapes notice. It is however, the front and center conflict of this Presidential campaign. So as you sit down to watch the final debate between the President and the Senator, listen to the manner in which their differences can be attributed to their respective loyalty and adherence to these two grand systems of thought, organization, and action.
And finally, when you’re evaluating which of the candidates will best serve our country and our collective future, ask yourself which of these two models is best suited for governing our nation during an era of unprecedented global connectedness, complexity, and urgency.
