There is quite an interesting discussion going on below regarding elections, and I’ve had little to say due to my cynicism. This stems from my having run for office in 1996. Yes, I lost, but that outcome was not the real learning experience. My opponent was a nice lady who grasped some of the significant elements of campaigning that I did not. She understood, for instance, as she went door-to-door, that the important outcome of each encounter was not exchange of information. Rather, when she left a doorstep, she left the understanding that she was in agreement with the person who answered the door. That was a smart thing, and not even a bad thing.
You can call this stupidity, but it was my first true foray into the electoral process, and I had a rather quixotic notion that I was carrying information to people who lacked my insight. I offered my views plainly. This created a rift, as there were a few issues that some people cared very deeply about. They become what we call a “third rail”, named after trains that run on tracks supplied by electricity, which is the third rail. You can safely ride the train and get to your destination, but touch that third rail and you die.
There were several such issues at play, even at the low level of House of Representatives – half of the bicameral body in Montana. One was abortion, another was wolves. There are others, but those two stand out in my memory. The state legislature could have some effect on wolves, but none on abortion, which was an issue commandeered by the U.S. Supreme Court, the only people who could touch it without losing office. Nonetheless, I had my views.
On wolves, which had been released in the wilds of Yellowstone National Park one year before, in 1995, the proper door stance was to sympathize with ranchers and adopt a view that the animals, which are vicious pack hunters and man’s best friend, really had no place in the wild. In fact, humans before us had gone to great lengths to remove wolves, grizzly bears and mountain lions from the wild, the latter without success. My attitude was that the natural balance required apex predators, and indeed reintroduction of wolves did strike a balance in Yellowstone by dealing with the overpopulation of elk, which prior to that had to be controlled by either mass starvation or culling.
My stance on wolves was this: Do you really want to live in a world that is safe for sheep?
The majority answer to that question was “Yes!.” I needed to do the wise political move, and hide my view, and sympathize with ranchers. I did not. Honest expression of views does not fly in politics, and while that came off as a rather courageous stance in some circles, in the real world it had to be stuffed. I did not do so, and paid a price for honesty. At the end here I will justify why dishonesty is the best policy in politics, really a smarter and better way to go about it while achieving the same ends.
But right now there is that other third rail, abortion.
That issue creates a natural divide. It is best avoided, but every one of us running had to deal with it even as we could not affect it in any way. The true answer, ugly necessity, was not going to win the day. The alternative, to hide from it and camouflage real views, was also a loser. It was a true conundrum, and one which I wrestled with personally.
I had been raised Catholic, and was at a precipice in my thinking where I resented the fact that we, as children, were robbed of freedom to choose in our schooling. Catholics were terrible this way, using fear to ensure that we thought one way only. We were told that having been born Catholic, there was no way out of it, as to abandon the Church was to condemn ourselves to the fires of hell. That was a childish view, and if we were to grow at all as humans, we had to overcome it. Most kids I grew up with did not. I did, and in fact had, eight years earlier, abandoned the Catholic Church, freed my children of any obligations there, and struck out on a life free from guilt. At first I expected retribution from on high for my act of defiance, but quite the opposite happened. I found that without that faith I now had time on Sundays to do as I pleased, and that I could think as I pleased on any subject.
Including abortion. I was not against it. I did not come out openly on the matter, but my parents and brothers, except the priest, sensed this about me, and the condemnations were open on the part of Mom and Dad, and quiet but clear in my brothers. I was excommunicated. Except by the priest. He was the only one understanding of a broader view.
How did I handle it on the doors? I hoped it never came up, but when it did, I think I fell back on ugly choice, to imagine a young girl in her teens who got carried away because our bodies come of age before our brains. Are we right to tell her that her life, her dreams and hopes are done, that she had to give it all up and raise that child? Some say yes, but my honest outtake on all of was no. Set her free. Set her boyfriend free. Go and sin no more.
That cost me many votes, but I did not care. It created a rift with my parents and brothers that never healed. So be it. I was like a homosexual in his or her teens, coming out. Courage, Mom. You should be proud of me. Instead, you forsook me.
Politics is not something designed for deep thought or honest and open debate. It is slogans and catch phrases. All successful politicians are practical people who have perfected the art of avoidance of real issues. You might say that they don’t have brains and souls in their callous disregard for honest debate. But there was one more thing I learned as I went door-to-door to maybe 2,000 homes: The people inside those homes are busy making a living, watching sports and entertainment, and raising their damned kids. They don’t have or take the time to think.
The thinking that must be done is done for them by their TVs (in those days, social media now and not much different). There is no point in trying to change them or reason with them. There’s no time for that. One carefully constructed TV ad will rule the day on any issue. As a politician the best plan is to touch them on some basic issues that don’t really matter, and avoid everything else. A smart politician knows to skim the surface, touch only lightly where touching is needed.
Because, truth is, once the election is over, people turn it all off and get back to their lives. You can vote as you please while in office, as there are enough votes on enough bills that you (and your opponents) can use them to paint any portrait of you.
I met thousands of people, and was disenchanted with any love of the electoral process, as there is no real exchange of ideas going on. There was only deeply studied techniques of persuasion, aka propaganda. Hardly anyone ever sat down and studied an issue or the views of any candidate. They voted, but once alone in the booth, they had nothing to fall back on but party affiliation. And that was how they voted.
There is an oversoul in politics. It is not all bad and corrupt. Legislators, once in office, are forced to deal with thorny problems and shrewd manipulators who control the real system of legislation from above. A few manage to save their dignity and take on a measure of resistance to that power from on high, and to actually do some good for us ordinary simple morons … these few are special and few in number.
In Montana, the shrewd manipulators above it all managed to remove the decent and smart political survivors who held office from the game. They did it by means of a device called … term limits. After that, the manipulators, the wolves, were set loose on the sheep.
