There is never an obvious time to begin resisting the status quo. Indeed that is part of what makes the status quo seem unchangeable: that there is no obvious or easy or convenient time to refuse to accept it. But whether it is a decision to refuse to move to the back of the bus or a decision to demand equal pay or a refusal to collaborate with the powers that be for fear of reprisal, there have been hundreds of people at different times and in different places who have - for whatever constellation of reasons and motives - chosen to reject the way things are as the way they must be.
Over the past few days, in various ways, different people have told me that I should simply accept Senator Obama's (and, for that matter, Senator McCain's) campaign tactics as "the way things are" or "politics as it is actually practiced". I have been told I am unrealistic or idealistic, too much so for "how things are". Often this is followed by a "lesser of two evils" argument. The supposedly realistic, pragmatic person speaking to me says something along the following lines: "Yes, you are correct. Senator Obama is a lousy candidate, who has no record and who will not stick his neck out for anything, let alone speak up against the sexism and misogyny run rampant this election cycle. But, he's better than Senator McCain because____." That _____ gets filled in a variety of ways: Senator Obama is less of a war monger; more likely not to veto legislation passed by a majority Democrat Congress, less likely to appoint ant-Roe justices to the Supreme Court.
Sorry. I am not voting for a ______. If the best that you can tell me about a candidate who you concede is lousy is that he at least is or will _____, that simply is not compelling.
If we voters continue to cast our ballots for candidates who are essentially _____, then we get ______ leadership. Empty, blank leadership.
This year one Party had the opportunity to nominate a candidate who, whatever her drawbacks as a person or a poltician, is not a ______. Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton took policy positions and stuck to them throughout the primary season as she has throughout her tenure as as Senator. The DNC, Senator Reid, and Speaker Pelosi decided they preferred a candidate who is a _______. They decided - and they may be right - that the Democrats were more likely to take the White House with a ______ than with a candidate of substance, with clear positions, and a track record.
I have repeatedly said that the most important issue in this Presidential election is not whether Senator McCain or Senator Obama wins. The most important issue is whether we as a people are willing to tolerate mediocrity and blankness rather than demand guts and leadership.
If we citizens do not demand guts and leadership, we will not get either. We will get what everybody tells me we must accept: craven politicians interested only in their own self-advancement rather than the public weal.
But this is tautology. And tautology can be transcended. We have had American politicians who have risen about pettiness and narrow self-interest to show real leadership. Other countries have also had such leaders.
I think I am more realistic, more practical, more pragmatic than those who tell me that given the options I should accept the lesser of two evils. I believe that the most realistic, most pragmatic response to evil of any kind is to refuse to tolerate it, not to condone it, to flat out reject it. Because a deal with a devil is still a deal with a devil even if there are more heinous devils out there. We need not and should not demand perfection from politicians. But we must, can, and should demand that they hold themselves to a standard by which we want to be governed.
The message that we citizens must send to politicians - both those who hold office now and those who aspire to hold office - is that we will not accept evil or mediocrity or cowardice. We must not reward these qualities. If no candidate for a particular office offers more than these quailities, we have an option. We can conscientiously abstain from endorsing any candidate for that office. We can begin to develop the habit of noncooperation, the refusal to be co-opted by the status quo simply because it is the status quo.
