Think of the Fun We Missed!

Imagine what it would be like to have a political process worth paying attention to

By Barbara Ehrenreich

(TIME, November 21) -- It was a season of ennui and loathing. Pundits exhausted their thesauruses in the search for new synonyms for doleful, dreary and vacuous. Ordinary folks made the classic finger-in-throat gesture, or pitched forward face first into their azalea beds. On the cover of the Nation, presidential history was depicted as a Darwinian descent from the triumphantly upright Franklin Roosevelt on down to an invertebrate Clinton-Dole level just above the primordial scum.

It was the first issue-free campaign, and without issues, we were left to ponder such pointless dichotomies as age vs. middle age, wounded right hand vs. groping one, brunet power wife vs. blond. When these palled, as they inevitably did by late August, there was nothing to think about except the peculiar fact that a D.C. dominatrix had been one of the first 12 people on earth to learn about life on Mars. That and the important finding that the macarena is a remarkably effective way of rousing people from life-threatening stupor.

In an October poll only 24% of the public could honestly say they were "paying attention," down from 42% at the same stage of the campaigns in '92. And in time, there was less and less to pay attention to. The only group to walk out of the Republican Convention was not the Buchananites but Ted Koppel and his camera crew. By October the candidates had become harder to find on TV than intelligent, nonviolent children's programming. There was talk, among the environmentally concerned, of recycling America's stock of voting booths as Portosans.

To all of which one might respond with a hearty "Whatever," until you recall we are talking about what is known, in candidate lingo, as "the greatest country on earth." If this were Liechtenstein or Togo, maybe a little apathy would be in order. But it's another matter when the heirs of Lexington and Valley Forge come to find their communal affairs so repellent.

The reasons go beyond the obvious limitations of the candidates or even the lack of sustainable suspense. What, to use, Dole's favorite locution, is a presidential election "about"? It's about government, in particular, Federal Government. And what, over the past 15 years, have our conservative politicians taught us about that nebulous entity? That it's an evil, of course, and not even a necessary one--a hideous succubus sucking away at the American spirit. (The unmentioned exceptions being those parts that involve prisons and the Pentagon, i.e., the ever colorful and entertaining use of armed force.) So in some ways, the soul-numbing tedium of '96 was the inevitable product of the venerable practice of government bashing. If these fellows were competing over something useful and productive--like the opportunity to write a season of Seinfeld scripts or be the host of the Academy Awards--there might be some reason to pay attention.

And of course, since both candidates agreed that "Big Government" is history, there wasn't a whole lot to talk about. Pollsters reported that people do have some actual concerns of the kind that might normally work their way into the political discourse--about health insurance, for example, and whether they will pass their twilight years fishing in Dumpsters. But since addressing these concerns might involve some, yuck, "government activism," nothing of consequence can be done. In fact, in the prevailing bipartisan ideology, nothing can ever be done, at least not through conscious human intention. We can only wait, like some poor lost Cargo Cult praying for treasure to drop from the sky, for the market to do it for us.

Hence the downward spiral of '96: the public didn't ask; the candidates didn't tell; and throughout the normally frenzied election-year media, a deathly hush prevailed. By the year 2000, it is confidently predicted, campaign coverage will be confined to a Website and the Federal Government will be an answering machine.

This is not a pretty trend. As any civics professor can tell you, the consequences of ignoring the political process are often unpleasant. Staving off tyranny requires not only the blood of patriots but also their close and undivided attention. And that can sometimes be even harder to give.

But not always. Imagine, if you will indulge in a utopian moment, what it would be like to have a political process worth paying attention to. One would find, in malls and in truck stops, over latte and Bud, a great roiling national debate on taxes and spending, inequality and wealth, and the purpose of (our national) life: co-workers grabbing your lapel and insisting you hear out their feelings on GATT. Haggard neighbors showing up late at night to tell you how they've been rethinking school vouchers. Grass-roots seminars on fiscal policy springing up at those ubiquitous soccer games. Because this is the true promise of democracy: that every few years, for a few weeks or so, every citizen gets to be a philosopher-king. Yes, there would be fist fights now and then, but also exciting new factions and friendships, and in general the kind of heady intensity that has been so thoroughly drained out of our public life.

Hedonistically speaking, then, the true tragedy of '96 is that it could have been a lot of fun. But maybe it's not too late to salvage the next round of national elections. With a little campaign-finance reform to level the playing field and a couple more political parties to choose from, democracy might not have to be such a drag.

Copyright © 1996 AllPolitics
All Rights Reserved

Terms under which this information is provided to you