Political Gardening: The End of War, The Death of the Selfie

Politics is war without bloodshed, someone named Chairman Mao once said.  Journalists come down from the hills after the battle is over, someone named Murray Kempton once said, and shoot the wounded.  Politics, with its war rooms and whatnot, is replete with metaphors about war and killing.

Today, between bouts of rain, I was out in the garden, overturning soil and clearing out weeds.  While I was doing this my eldest son was playing a make-believe game about keeping an eye out for manufactured bad guys.  

As I dug and churned, I quizzed him about his strategy for dealing with these bad guys, what he knew about them; their objectives, strength, location, and so on.  Then we gamed out strategies to gain intel, disrupt their internal operations and build coalitions with third-party groups to help outflank our foe.

Play time gets pretty involved at the C-E household.

I told all of this jokingly to my wife, later, who rolled her eyes and tsked her disapproval.  "Can't a game just be a game", she asked?

It made me wonder - could a democracy ever just be a democracy, or is politics invariably a competitive sport?  Will it always draw and reward the bare-knuckle brawlers, sociopaths and narcissists?  Can good people not get drawn in to the petty, pseudo-war qualities of partisanship?

Politics has always been a game of dominance, borrowing tools from other sectors for success.  Politicians get media training, like a weak-tea actor's class; much of the pomp and circumstance around political campaigns and announcements borrows heavily from the entertainment sector.

On the war room side, well - the name tells you everything.  Listen to a political speech or even better, a rally speech to a loyal audience.  It's all about us vs them, with them being out to destroy everything we hold dear.  The strategies and tactics pull heavily from military thinking; spies, offensives, counter-attacks, messaging superiority, so on and so forth.

The Art of Politics has become the science of dehumanization.  After all, you couldn't do to someone you saw as like you what you do to an opponent in war.

The people, meanwhile, are apparently more forgiving than politicians or journalists.  They have a better understanding of human failings.  They are wired differently than the hacks or the flaks.  The people get weary of all the political bloodshed, and all the shooting of the wounded.  They forgive and forget.

It's a fascinating question, this - are partisans fundamentally different from each other, down the neurological hard-wiring?  Are political people made of a different fibre than everyone else?

Of course not.  People are people and, as we know, individuals are capable of some extreme behaviour both positive and negative under adverse conditions.

What makes politics so fascinating is that it serves as its own cause and effect.  It's the series of small choices that nudge the overarching tone in one narrative.  

Wars, after all, are borne out of choices made by individuals, but when new individuals are brought into an already tense environment and are taught by those who've caused the friction in the first place, what happens then?  

You might say that tribal warfare is inevitable and that competitive relationships always, always evolve into zero-sum games.

If you thought that, though, you'd be wrong.

History is replete with second chances, honour in the heat of battle and friendships forged on the battleground.  My personal favourite story is about how a German Airforce officer took a risk and pulled rank to free some Allied Airmen from Buchenwald.  These lucky ones may have been enemies of war, but they were colleagues in arms as well.

If anything, the history of humanity is away from small, simple tribes in perpetual competition to larger, more complex systems with greater latitude for specialization, collaboration and quality of life.

So I find it all too telling when political people muse about the differences they feel must exist between themselves and someone else.  I'm sure Rob Ford has had similar moments of self-pity as he's considered what he's done with his life.

As Ford (hopefully) begins his long, hard journey towards self-recovery, he's going to be learning a lesson that many who've positioned themselves as "different" and therefore, subjected to a different set of standards have learned.

Within each of us is the potential for both rage and serenity, great deeds and great horrors.  When we think competitively, strive to get ahead by all means, we try to make ourselves into something that we aren't.  

By so doing, we internally limit our choices.  Our underlying ethics, however, remain the same.

When we justify doing things we know to be unkind, it's a choice that has consequences - but always, a choice.

Ultimately, it's a choice to die alone, cut off from others both physically and emotionally.

When we wash ourselves clean of the manufactured identities we create for ourselves - especially in politics - we recognize what part of us has grappled with all along; that we aren't made of different stuff, aren't subject to different moral codes and have simply made a choice to dehumanize ourselves so that we may do the same to others.  

It was convenient at the time - and in politics, timing is everything.  

But a series of bitterly-fought victories that simply lead to the next battle isn't a life.  The world doesn't flow by the four-year cycle, the Legislative calendar or even the business calendar.  Births, deaths, losses, challenges and opportunities come at any moment, in unscheduled ways.  

Our lives are framed by the choices we make about what happens around us - not just to us, or what we do to others, but between us.  Life isn't meant to be convenient, but it is a journey of discovery.

Over these weeks, if he is like others who have walked this road, he will come - as the ancient oracle at Delphi instructs - to know himself, perhaps for the first time.

When we choose to live our lives this way - as an experience we engage in together rather than a battle to be won - we truly live.

Life isn't a game, but it can be a dream.

The rain has stopped - it's back to the garden for my boy and I.

If You Have Democracy Today, Thank a Politician

Good ideas, communicated effectively, can generate hope, enthusiasm and excitement and, with an election on the near horizon, that's where the PC focus has to be.

 

 

One of the smartest things Government Relations people will tell their clients leading in to a meeting with elected officials - "thank them for something."  You want to start a conversation off on the right foot, creating a playing field where ideas can be discussed freely; putting people's backs up, forcing them onto the defensive from the get-go is not conducive to nurturing a relationship or getting results.

 

"Thank you" aren't words politicians hear very often - everyone has too many things to complain about to stop and recognize the things are elected representatives get right.  This is even more applicable to Opposition Parties, loath to suggest government gets anything right; that's too much like rewarding the enemy.  A war roomer once told me the best thing an Opposition Party could do would be loosing monkeys in the Legislative Chamber, creating absolute havoc and stopping anything valuable from getting done.  It's clearly a lesson Tim Hudak and his inner circle have taken to heart.

 

From the other side, knowing everyone is out to attack them, it's imperative for politicians to focus on what they do right and ignore what they do wrong - there's no point in giving ammunition to those looking to pillory you.  The same even goes with good policy ideas; if you put your vision out too early, it's guaranteed everyone who wants to see you fail will go out of their way to find the negatives.

 

What you end up with is self-congratulating politicians who refuse to admit they are capable of mistakes, governments that hoard ideas and are loathe to table anything bold and Parties that figure they will never make voters happy so instead, focus on determining the right ones to piss off to gain "vote against the other guy" support.

 

Gas plants, wars on teachers, attacks on foreign students and workers or unions - none of this is constructive.  None of it helps nurture a strong, united province able to compete against other jurisdictions around the world.

 

You can blame politicians, but that tendency is itself part of the problem. 

 

If we really want collaboration - if we truly are after big ideas, bold reforms and structural change - we need to change the political culture, first.  That means easing our politicians off the defensive so they can put their guard down and maybe have enough faith in the people that bold ideas will be considered and debated rather than ignored or lambasted.  Then, start presenting "how about this" ideas - don't just criticize, but give them more raw material to work with.  When Parties work together and find common-ground solutions, congratulate them; positive reinforcement works better than no reinforcement at all.

 

The only way we're going to start addressing the big issues is to have true debates, not a series of attack points, over potential solutions.  That won't happen as long as the public is only responding to attack ads. 

 

If we truly want to get Ontario growing again, we're going to have to nurture that kind of growth.

 

Starting with the odd "thank you" will go a long way.