Reply #60: this is politics, not religion

[Two Americas]

The goal of religion is to improve individuals, and to judge and analyze everything upon that basis.

The goal of politics is to change the conditions under which people live.

Approaching politics as though it were religion is inherently reactionary, since it can only benefit those who are already well-off if our attention is diverted away from politics and over to self-improvement - away from thinking in public terms, and over to thinking in personal terms. If it is all about individuals, and no one individual is "better" than anyone else - so therefore what people are saying should be dismissed and ignored - that precludes building any mass movement. That can only serve privilege, and promote the needs and desires of the wealthy and powerful few who control our lives.

Personalization of political issues takes many forms, including placing the personal qualities of individual politicians above political issue son importance, characterizing the political opinions of others we disagree with as "what they want," as well as a wide variety of clever and destructive methods for assassinating the character of those expressing dissent, and the tossing around of derogatory and malicious accusations such as "crazy" and "tinfoil."

Another deceptive rhetorical trick is to say "don't get me wrong, I agree with you, but not with the way you are going about it." We saw this used with devastating and malicious effect recently against GLBTQ folks and their defenders, and the community is still badly fractured by that. Fracturing the community is the goal, so that the few can intimidate the many and dominate the discussion.

We are witnessing modern "liberal" and "progressive" politics being hijacked and transformed into a mean spirited and aggressive defense of privilege and power. This now represents a greater threat than the right wing, since it is so deceptive and convoluted, and since it is always worse to be wounded in the house of your friends since you cannot see it coming as easily nor defend yourself.

Saying that "you are no better than the thugs you oppose" is a variation on an age old attack that has been used against every movement for social justice and freedom. The goal there is to portray "both sides" as equally "bad," to scare people away from the dissenters and back into the fold, and that is an obvious defense of the status quo and an assault on any opposition to entrenched wealth and power and privilege.

In the 1850's, the Abolitionists were told they were "no better" than the slave owners. The opponents of the Abolitionists said that "not all slave owners are bad" and that "not all slaves are saints."

The same argument was used against the early Labor organizers, against the Suffragettes, the Civil Rights movement and every other political movement that fought for the people.