We all have a story we tell ourselves, a narrative about who we are and what matters to us. It is the carefully curated working mythology of our daily lives that helps direct our decisions and fortifies us in seasons of adversity. That story can act like a True North in disorienting days like the ones we find ourselves tumbling through in this moment.
I think that we tend to believe that our single vote sends a message to the world. The truth is that our votes DO count, but only as part of a whole. Refusing to vote for a candidate because they don’t meet your every expectation is self-righteous and the height of hubris. If we want a world that is fair and equitable, vote for the person who espouses those same values, even if he or she isn’t perfect and sometimes makes mistakes.
One issue voters - and there are many kinds (abortion, religion, foreign policy, social economics, age, and political tribalism) - may scratch their purist itch, but they pay a price that they refuse to acknowledge by accepting the baggage that comes with their single issue preference. Their morality becomes twisted into a series of ad hoc justifications and willful blindness regarding the full consequences. They certainly have the right to waste their vote, but as the country reflects greater and tighter divisions, their choice seems somewhat irresponsible to the society that supports and nurtures them. Ah well, at least they can pat themselves on their own backs. I have several friends and acquaintenances who of this class, and not one of them cares a whit about the other moral issues implicated in their single issue stance. Even though their choice may/will lose, the damage to their moral core remains. I care for them still.
The moral certitude of the young is laudable esp. re:Gaza, but they have a responsibility to “turn-and-burn” to blunt the real threat of national violence here.
Respectfully, what of the bodily autonomy of Palestinian women?
What of the destroyed and leveled Palestinian schools and hospitals, the lack of clean water, food, medical supplies, and menstrual products?
What about the Biden admin increasing enforcement to turn away asylum seekers and migrants, implementing and expanding deadly policies that the administration has inherited, and ICE expanding the use of solitary confinement under this admin?
I could go on. But, I don't believe it is okay to ignore injustice rather than prophetically speaking truth to power because it is your ideological side. And it isn't right to drape or obscure issues in euphemisms or buzzwords, either.
Again, as I've written many times before, you're choosing to make what you believe as Biden's mishandling of the Gaza violence as the single issue. You are treating it the way Evangelicals treat abortion. Read my piece from yesterday if you haven't. I agree that the Biden Administration has made great errors with regarding to Palestine, but to reject a president and party that I find affinity with on just about every other issue (especially in light of the unprecedented malevolence of Trump and the GOP), it's reckless and irresponsible to reject them on the basis of this singular event (one that involves a conflict that has existed for decades and that no world leaders have been able to solve).
No one is saying Biden is above criticism, but as I replied initially, if you're willing to toss out every human and civil rights position the Dems are on the side of, I'll simply say that I disagree completely.
You are actually responding to a post where I lay all this out, and clearly express my disappointment with the Biden Administration but give the reasons why this is not a dealbreaker: because NO ONE, including Palestinians will be safer with a Trump presidency. It's really that simple.
I understand your point, I can try to clarify mine a bit more. I asked the question in terms of leveling judgment and critique. It appears that you employ more restrained language in your moral evaluation of the Biden administration. This gives the impression that you either are using moral language and high ground to articulate your general analyses, but are rather animated by ideological partisanship than moral zeal, or are not precisely aware of the injustices that are happening/how directly involved the administration has been/how critical their support has been to the war crimes. That may not be true, but that is the vibe. If someone bypassed the injustices you describe within evangelicalism with the same tone and language, I believe you would consider that inappropriate or a justification. Would you have the same measured grace and nuance for the evangelical church? Or would you have the same zeal for the Biden administrations ongoing complicity in death and destruction and Biden's past support of mass incarceration, Iraq War, etc.?
Secondly, at this point in the game, do you believe the Biden administration cares about their loyalists? If so, why wouldn't you use your voice and vote to leverage them to stop the support of ongoing war crimes before November? Hundreds of thousands more may die in these next 6 months. Frankly, I am not sure that they believe Trump is an existential threat to democracy, or they would end this wildly unpopular foreign policy position or run a candidate who isn't polling at 10 points below replacement.
Why would Joe Biden continue an unpopular support of Israel if it is tanking his poll numbers and risking an electoral loss in the general?
And why should people not leverage the withholding of their vote to force the hand of the administration to change policy now? By the time we get to November hundreds of thousands of more lives will be lost.
And lastly, why do we bypass the suffering of others by calling complicity with their extermination merely "not being a perfect candidate"?
I think that we tend to believe that our single vote sends a message to the world. The truth is that our votes DO count, but only as part of a whole. Refusing to vote for a candidate because they don’t meet your every expectation is self-righteous and the height of hubris. If we want a world that is fair and equitable, vote for the person who espouses those same values, even if he or she isn’t perfect and sometimes makes mistakes.
Perfectly said
One issue voters - and there are many kinds (abortion, religion, foreign policy, social economics, age, and political tribalism) - may scratch their purist itch, but they pay a price that they refuse to acknowledge by accepting the baggage that comes with their single issue preference. Their morality becomes twisted into a series of ad hoc justifications and willful blindness regarding the full consequences. They certainly have the right to waste their vote, but as the country reflects greater and tighter divisions, their choice seems somewhat irresponsible to the society that supports and nurtures them. Ah well, at least they can pat themselves on their own backs. I have several friends and acquaintenances who of this class, and not one of them cares a whit about the other moral issues implicated in their single issue stance. Even though their choice may/will lose, the damage to their moral core remains. I care for them still.
The moral certitude of the young is laudable esp. re:Gaza, but they have a responsibility to “turn-and-burn” to blunt the real threat of national violence here.
Great article
What would it look like to hold the Biden administration to the same nature of critique that you extend to the evangelicals?
It would like this:
Is the Biden Administration trying to take body autonomy from women? No.
Is it trying to ban books and eliminate the teaching of American History? No.
Is it collaborating with the Supreme Court to avoid Constitutional Law? No.
Is it trying to legislate its religion through Project 2025? Also, no.
Is it trying to make healthcare decisions for transgender human beings? No again.
Is it trying to eliminate diversity and inclusion programs in colleges and businesses? Negative.
Is it trying to get rid of immigrants? No.
That's what it would look like, Andrew.
Respectfully, what of the bodily autonomy of Palestinian women?
What of the destroyed and leveled Palestinian schools and hospitals, the lack of clean water, food, medical supplies, and menstrual products?
What about the Biden admin increasing enforcement to turn away asylum seekers and migrants, implementing and expanding deadly policies that the administration has inherited, and ICE expanding the use of solitary confinement under this admin?
I could go on. But, I don't believe it is okay to ignore injustice rather than prophetically speaking truth to power because it is your ideological side. And it isn't right to drape or obscure issues in euphemisms or buzzwords, either.
Some sources worth considering: https://www.aljazeera.com/features/longform/2024/1/23/how-doctors-in-gaza-persevere-amid-israel-attacks
https://theintercept.com/2024/01/26/biden-abortion-rights-gaza/
https://humanrightsfirst.org/library/a-shameful-record-biden-administrations-use-of-trump-policies-endangers-people-seeking-asylum/
Again, as I've written many times before, you're choosing to make what you believe as Biden's mishandling of the Gaza violence as the single issue. You are treating it the way Evangelicals treat abortion. Read my piece from yesterday if you haven't. I agree that the Biden Administration has made great errors with regarding to Palestine, but to reject a president and party that I find affinity with on just about every other issue (especially in light of the unprecedented malevolence of Trump and the GOP), it's reckless and irresponsible to reject them on the basis of this singular event (one that involves a conflict that has existed for decades and that no world leaders have been able to solve).
No one is saying Biden is above criticism, but as I replied initially, if you're willing to toss out every human and civil rights position the Dems are on the side of, I'll simply say that I disagree completely.
You are actually responding to a post where I lay all this out, and clearly express my disappointment with the Biden Administration but give the reasons why this is not a dealbreaker: because NO ONE, including Palestinians will be safer with a Trump presidency. It's really that simple.
I understand your point, I can try to clarify mine a bit more. I asked the question in terms of leveling judgment and critique. It appears that you employ more restrained language in your moral evaluation of the Biden administration. This gives the impression that you either are using moral language and high ground to articulate your general analyses, but are rather animated by ideological partisanship than moral zeal, or are not precisely aware of the injustices that are happening/how directly involved the administration has been/how critical their support has been to the war crimes. That may not be true, but that is the vibe. If someone bypassed the injustices you describe within evangelicalism with the same tone and language, I believe you would consider that inappropriate or a justification. Would you have the same measured grace and nuance for the evangelical church? Or would you have the same zeal for the Biden administrations ongoing complicity in death and destruction and Biden's past support of mass incarceration, Iraq War, etc.?
Secondly, at this point in the game, do you believe the Biden administration cares about their loyalists? If so, why wouldn't you use your voice and vote to leverage them to stop the support of ongoing war crimes before November? Hundreds of thousands more may die in these next 6 months. Frankly, I am not sure that they believe Trump is an existential threat to democracy, or they would end this wildly unpopular foreign policy position or run a candidate who isn't polling at 10 points below replacement.
Why would Joe Biden continue an unpopular support of Israel if it is tanking his poll numbers and risking an electoral loss in the general?
And why should people not leverage the withholding of their vote to force the hand of the administration to change policy now? By the time we get to November hundreds of thousands of more lives will be lost.
And lastly, why do we bypass the suffering of others by calling complicity with their extermination merely "not being a perfect candidate"?
Could not have stated it better myself! Spot on!!