If the Democrats Win…

I find it necessary here to make a few assertions about future the state of this nation if a Democratic candidate, no matter which, wins the next election. (In the interest of full disclosure, I am not a Democrat, but do support Barack Obama.)

1. This country will not fall apart. Whatever your political leanings, it is worth remembering that no matter who wins the election, the United States will remain the United States. Our 200 years of history, built upon the brilliant framework laid out in the Constitution, is not in jeopardy because of our next President. Congress will remain, the Supreme Court will continue to issue rulings, the market will continue to function, and people will not fall down dead.

This country has survived Presidents of both parties before, to the surprise of a great many people. In fact, Presidents of both parties have done great things for this nation. If the Democrats win, it does not mean that America will go to hell in a handbasket.

The idea, commonly expressed by both sides of the political divide, that if X or Y candidate wins the election horrible things will happen to the country shows a disturbing lack of faith in America. Such ideas fail to recognize the fact that America is created as a republican democracy in which the people rule and leaders are kept in check through governmental institutions.

2. We will not all lose our morals. Contrary to popular opinion in some circles, Democrats are not immoral or amoral creatures. While they may not hold the same set of values Republicans do, this does not mean that they are any less concerned about God, America, or people.

Abortion is usually brought up as a prime example of why being a Democrat is immoral. While I fully oppose abortion, this issue alone does not define the Democratic Party. Without even examining the many other ways in which Democrats support and show kindness to people—helping AIDS victims, the poor, those without jobs, immigrants, etc.—we can recognize that abortion itself is a nuanced issue. What about the 50 year old couple with grown kids who discover that the wife is pregnant and the baby has Down syndrome? Or the 14 year old mother with only one parent who lives in the city ghetto? Even if we unequivocally oppose abortion, as I do, we must recognize that those who support it are not heartless and cruel people.

Christianity is also linked with morals. If we have a Democratic president it does not mean that he or she will automatically not be a Christian. (It also does not mean they will be a Christian either.) Dismissing someone’s Christianity as illegitimate simply because of their political affiliation, without looking at their testimony and life displays a stunning level of ignorance and pride.

3. The world will not devolve into terrorism and warfare. Democrats care about our national and international security just as much as Republicans do. Without going into whether or not the foreign policy of past Presidents has worked, it is safe to say that even if a Democrat wins, our country will not necessarily be in any worse danger than it is already. Just because a Democratic President would do things differently than a Republican President does not mean he or she would do things incorrectly. There are many ideas in foreign policy that have been successful in the past, and not all of them were monopolized by one party.

While it is possible that doing things such as changing our policies in the Middle East could make us more vulnerable, it could also do the opposite. Any area of the world is extremely complicated and perhaps a change in policy to emphasize democracy and negotiation over force could raise perceptions of America and instead make us safer. Neither route is inherently correct, but both are worth considering.

4. Rhetoric might prove true. While it must be granted that a large part of politics is smooth talking and attempting to promise things that cannot be accomplished, this is not limited to the Democratic party. It is disturbing how fast ideologues will dismiss a speech which seeks the middle ground on an issue, such as Obama’s speech on racism, by calling it just a brilliant piece of rhetoric used to fool people. There are two things to be said on this issue.

First, rhetoric in and of itself is not a negative thing. The ability to eloquently put words together, to navigate an issue in a way that gives play to both sides of an argument, and to draw people in to a belief is not bad. In fact, it can be a sign of greatleadership. Dismissing any speech, on either side of the political divide, that shows such characteristics simply because it is “rhetoric” is illogical and ignorant.

Second, rhetoric is not necessarily a facade put up by a politician. While any politician will “moderate” himself or herself in order to pick up more votes, that does not mean he or she is lying. We must examine politicians’ words critically while at the same time being willing to grant that they may actually believe in what they say. If their rhetoric navigates a middle ground and examines both sides of an issue, perhaps that is a good thing, something that may actually be useful in a President.

Yes, much rhetoric will just be empty words as a President can only do so much. But some may come true and even that which does not still serves to indicate where a candidate’s beliefs lie.

To conclude, we must guard against becoming too polarized. It does no good to demonize the opposition, to insist that all right is on our side. As in my previous post, we must allow ourselves to be questioned by the other side. We must acknowledge that those on the other side may be right in some areas and that they care as passionately about many of the same things as us. If the Democrats win, it will not be the end of the world, even if you do not agree with them.