A
country is at great risk when the irrational overtakes and becomes the
surrogate for the rational. And a country is at graver risk when the public
succumbs to a willing suspension of disbelief in this free-fall descent into
irrationality.
Yet, this could be the state of
American politics and governance today -- a condition that eludes adequate
description by the English language and the current vocabulary.
Regarding the presidential
campaigns, some argue that the anger and resentment of many Americans toward
the failures of government have created the means for irrationality to reign.
One of the candidates has concluded that the "stupidity" of
government is the root cause of this national malaise and deep-seated public
fury.
This assertion of stupidity is
made seemingly reasonable by the absurdity of other statements and intentions
of what this candidate would do as president. Employing more than "water
boarding" in fighting our enemies, walling off Mexico and creating millions
of jobs merely by waving what passes for his magic wand, for example, are
simply preposterous promises.
Tragically, of the five remaining
candidates in that race, two are delusional, one is staggeringly ignorant, one
is dependent on family ties to save him, and only one seems to have the right
balance of character and experience to be president. Yet, barring a miracle, a
brokered convention or another entry, the best qualified candidate so far is
unlikely to win nomination.
The other side has so far run a
more conventional race. Except, a democratic socialist whose proposals may
capture the anger of many Americans while ignoring reality is surely
unelectable. And his opponent is so much a part of the hated establishment that
even if not crippled by allegations of mishandling government emails, she
likewise may be unelectable.
While exact parallels do not
exist, if this irrationality persists, the 21st century equivalent of a Barry Goldwater facing
a George McGovern (both
were soundly trashed -- by LBJ in 1964 and Richard Nixon in
1972) could define the 2016 election. Fortunately, it is not out of the
question that given the prospect of one unelectable candidate running against
another unelectable one, as nature abhors a vacuum, so too politics will
intervene. If this happens, rationality (or sanity) would sweep away the
collective madness embraced by those who support the current leading
contenders.
In blunt terms, if Donald Trump continues to be headed for the
Republican nomination, the party can never let that stand. And if Sen. Bernie Sanders appears
headed for the top of the ticket, which, too, may not last.
At this stage however, and
primaries in Nevada and South Carolina withstanding, one cannot be bullish
about the next four years. Added to pressing domestic issues, the array of
international crises and clearly the decline of American influence, leadership
and authority abroad and an economy that has caught the flu or worse, a Trump
versus Sanders race would be as catastrophic as it is delusional.
Sadly, the righting balance of
Congress has long been missing in action.
The death of Supreme Court Justice Antonin
Scalia predictably
triggered another bout of irrational politics. Republicans, led by Senate Majority
Leader Mitch
McConnell, promptly rejected consideration of any nominee proposed
by President Barack Obama as a replacement. The argument that
Obama was a "lame duck" and hence should defer to his successor was
as nonsensical as it was irrational.
By that metric, Obama might as
well resign and defer everything to the next president. Now if politics today
were rational, would the Republicans not have been better off saying that the
president proposes and in this case the Senate disposes? Should Obama send a
nominee to the Senate who is seen as widely qualified, by refusing to consider
in advance any candidate, Republicans would surely harm their electoral chances
in November. And if the candidate had bipartisan support, why not confirm that
individual?
It is often hard to separate
stupidity from irrationality. In addition to character and experience, competence,
objectivity and rationality are needed in the candidates seeking the presidency
-- and in large quantities. The further tragedy is that America's political
system may be so broken that not even the most stunning crisis will force
repair.
Comments
Post a Comment