The
coins on our counter and in our pockets carry the slogan “Out of
Many, One.” But that is not a common theme in our society nowadays.
Instead, writes Jeremy Engels in The
Politics of Resentment
(Penn State Press, 2015), the operative slogan is “Out of One,
Two.”
Democracy
plays out differently in various times and places. It means, however,
that the populace can routinely hold the powerful in check. Democracy
is an alternative to authoritarianism, oligarchy, dictatorship,
totalitarianism or aristocracy. James Madison (1758-1831) and other
founders of our country wanted a democracy in which citizens had
power, but not in free-wheeling anarchistic style. Madison promoted
the wide interplay of factions. Each faction would advance its
agenda. Each group had to play on a large political field and thus
could not succeed without the backing of other groups that shared
some part of the original agenda. In forming a coalition the group
had to temper its agenda.
In
our society, Engels details, Madison's factions (e
pluribus unum)
are reduced to two (e
unibus duo).
It is us against those whom we resent. The silent majority resents
the loudmouthed pleaders. Those with hard-working family values
resent immigrants who supposedly take away jobs. Those who in theory
exhibit a Christian lifestyle resent Muslims who supposedly want to
take over.
Meanwhile,
the powerful elites become more powerful because the mechanisms for
democratic accountability are neglected. The grievances of the
populace are “channeled at the wrong targets,” says Engels.
Resentful rhetoric, as heard on some radio shows and at campaign
rallies, is counter-productive. The audience might momentarily feel
charged-up; ready to counter their cultural opposites. As Engels
convincingly shows, however, the resentment “does not hasten
justice.” It actually perpetuates suffering because it locks the
aggrieved group into victim status. Instead of honing the political
skills that lead to change, resentful groups wallow in blaming,
name-calling and pointless behavior.
The
rhetoric of resentment contains lots of violent metaphors that
eventually have an effect on conduct. Engels clearly states that no
direct line exists between, for example, a candidate or radio host
who plays to resentment and, for example, a crazed shooter in a
school building. Violent language does though create a culture of
fear, a culture with weak restraints.
One
of Engel’s five chapters is largely given to Sarah Palin, who
recently endorsed Donald Trump for president. She obviously does not
favor acts of violence. But a close reading of her talks reveals
violent terms aplenty. She paints herself and her followers as
victims. To Palin, “the other” is not a legitimate political
opponent, but a hated evil enemy.
In
recent years some people (lay people, some parish staff, a few
bishops) have brought the nastiness of the culture wars (a metaphor)
inside the church. They don’t let faith enlighten public life; they
use the resentments of public life to define our faith. They may
think our times require a holy crusade (metaphorically). Their
posture, however, certainly achieves the opposite of what they
desire. In fact, their ideological notion of religion is dangerous.
Their backwards approach is similar to that of radical Muslims who
use an ideology to interpret God’s revelation.
The
opposite of resentment is gratitude; both an individual attitude
of gratitude
and a public politics of thanksgiving. To be continued…
Droel
edits INITIATIVES (PO Box 291102, Chicago, IL 60629), a free print
newsletter on faith and work.
No comments:
Post a Comment