As the upcoming mid term elections draw near, political opponents have drawn lines in the sand and disparaging remarks are flying through the air from both sides of the aisle. Supporters of their candidates have also joined the fray. Such is the nature of American politics. Some of the most renowned political pundits on the air have called for a return to a more civil approach to political discourse. Unfortunately, civil political debate has never been a dominant presence on the American landscape. Others call for unbiased reporting from the predominant newspapers and periodicals available to the public. By looking back in time, one can quickly come to the conclusion that these publications have never been unbiased in their reporting. From the founding of our country, journalists have always been the loudspeaker for their respective factions.
Several newspapers vehemently attacked the policies of President George Washington's administration. Many of them accused him, even with the absence of supporting facts, of a monarchic form of government. Of course, in today's world, he is revered as the father of our country. Thomas Jefferson and James Madison corresponded frequently over the fear of a developing carnivorous factionalism within our fledgling republic. Madison's Federalist #10 dealt specifically with this problem. Jefferson felt that a revolution now and again was a healthy antidote for renewing the viability of democratic governing. Factionalism reached new heights during the presidency of John Adams. Our founding fathers initially felt that we had no need for the presence of political parties in our system of government. Reality quickly gave way to the development of political parties. Vice President Jefferson covertly campaigned against the policies of President Adams. Jefferson's activities led to the formation of the Democratic-Republican Party. This political party became the counter political force to the Federalist Party of Adams. Adams was vehemently attacked by the Democratic-Republicans during his bid for reelection. Pejorative remarks were leveled at him by political operatives and newspapers. These activities directly led to his defeat and the ascent of the Democratic-Republicans. The enmity between Jefferson and Adams lasted for over a decade. At the urging of Abigail Adams, the two men reestablished their friendship and remained so until their deaths on the Fourth of July in 1826. Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr epitomize the more deadly aspects of carnivorous political factionalism. Their pernicious political diatribe led directly to the duel at Weehawken in 1803. As we all know, Hamilton paid for his hatred of Burr with his life.
Looking at the early years of our country, one could quickly come to the conclusion that factionalism was noxious for our country. Is this assumption correct? The years leading up to the Civil War were filled with political compromise. Two great statesmen represent this era of factional suppression. Senator Daniel Webster of Massachusetts and Senator Henry Clay of Kentucky valiantly attempted to avoid the inevitable Civil War. They fought for common ground. As factions for the North and South grew in opposition to each other, Webster and Clay held us together. Unfortunately, their joint efforts were doomed to fail. The Missouri Compromise of 1820 and the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 are two examples of an attempt to find common ground. Webster and Clay supported these legislative measures. Their oratory in both the House and Senate held our country together as we tread through the murky waters of slavery. Would our country have dissolved prematurely if these two men had not practiced legislative civility? Nobody can know for certain but, did the suppression of factionalism only delay the inevitable explosion of the Civil War? The real issue these men bring to light is that we can, as a nation, not devolve into rampant salacious political dialog.
As we approach these elections we need to remain informed. All of us bring preformed opinions to every issue. Regardless of how open minded we attempt to be, all of us are products of our environment. As the old adage goes, "birds of a feather flock together". We all should practice the golden rule and treat others in the same manner as we desire to be treated. We need to politely listen, observe, and read the opinions of others. When afforded the opportunity, we need to state our case and support it with relevant facts. If your opinion doesn't carry the day and the electorate heads in a different direction, we need to support those who have been elected by recognizing the fact that they are now in power. If required, we should re-analyze our position on specific issues and provide a relevant, well informed, fact based opposition to their governmental policies. Just as assuredly as the ocean tide floods and ebbs, the political party in power comes and goes. The polite and informed disagreement amongst the electorate will have a direct impact on the form of political diatribe to be found in Washington D.C. Factionalism is neither friend nor foe. It merely mirrors the civility, or lack thereof, amongst the populace.
No comments:
Post a Comment