In mid-August when the dates for Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearing were announced, mental preparedness began for what was sure to be a partisan display. The audience hasn’t been disappointed.
If there’s anything we need in the current political system, it’s a bit more of the boring and formulaic. But during a time when presidential tweets routinely top the news cycle and a judge’s missed handshake with a shooting victim’s father is played off as complete disinterest in gun violence, who is really looking for an increase in the calm? Such an approach is drowned out by the colorful, competing forces that make everything into something, whether it’s substantial or not.
The exhausting theatrics on display at and in reaction to the confirmation hearings aren’t actually out of the norm. More than anything, they serve as a mirror held up to the public with the question, “Is this what we have become?”
I’m afraid the answer is a resounding, “Yes.” It’s easy to look at those on the screen as the problem. In reality, we all contribute.
The passion exhibited before and near us is well within the purview of current norms. For example, not long before President Trump won the election, members of the LGBT community expressed fear that a Trump administration, with the supposedly homophobic Vice President Mike Pence, would mean an end to LGBT rights and safety within the United States. Naturally, such a fear was grounded in no truth, but still, was expressed as fact. So, too, are the reactions to Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s pending confirmation. We’re told women will lose their reproductive rights and access to contraception, minority voting rights will be under attack, and LGBT freedoms, including same-sex marriage, will be stripped.
I’m not sure when we gave in to assumptions and overreactions as the first course of action, but it’s become our default setting. It’s near-impossible for political opponents to just be fellow humans who hold different views. Instead, they must be amoral enemies who could never be good parents, family, friends, or community members. The labels that we apply to adversaries on issues like taxes, spending, abortion, healthcare, the military, and education carry over into how we view their humanity.
These tendencies are not specific to one side. As we’ve become more divided as a nation, we’re convinced that “the Right” and “the Left” is generally made up of the same type of individuals. In reality, as we well know from interacting with those nearest to us ideologically, this is never the case. The differences among allies are stark and seem to be growing.
Take, for instance, Alex Jones, who was banned by Twitter on Thursday. He is considered a conservative commentator by those who reside on the Left side of the aisle. When viewing him from the Right, the definitions change. To those who consider themselves true conservatives, Jones is an alt-right darling, given to conspiratorial fantasies and fear-mongering. Meanwhile, his supporters like to view him as a fan of freedom, liberty, and information. In reaction to his permanent suspension from Twitter, some applauded, some affirmed a private company’s right to do as they please, and others consider it a direct and terrible attack on the diversity of thought. If you question these respective groups and how they feel about the other, you are sure to get rather vicious statements labeling opponents as extreme, hateful, bigoted, and fascist.
Now is the ideal time for an injection of calm into the frenzy that we see on Capitol Hill, social media, and in our own communities. But do we want things to be toned down? Is that even preferred? Does it even matter?
A common complaint from conservatives during the 2016 presidential campaign was that a good portion of the GOP voted for Donald Trump because they wanted to be entertained. A staid and experienced politician, like Gov. Scott Walker, was never going to be elected president in the modern era. That brand of normalcy may have worked in decades past, but in the fast-paced, tech-obsessed present, we want the soundbites, shock, and yes, even the offense. The media bubbles convince us that the best way to counter the enemy is through harsh language and outrageous rhetoric. Anything calm really means defeat. Engaging without insults and drama indicates an unwillingness to fight.
When tuning in to the confirmation hearings and seeing Sen. Cory Booker’s “Spartacus moment” of political sacrifice, it strikes us as odd and overblown. But is it so unexpected? Doesn’t such behavior just follow suit? It’s what politicians, celebrities, and even the average American with a social media account might engage in and applaud. However, even though it exists right in front of us, it is not reality.
Somewhere, in the midst of the rage, hyperbole, and cloaked handmaids is a much more normal present. If you strip away the political excess that drives the madness, you’re left with perhaps just a bit of tedious disagreement. If each encounter was not documented by a tweet or viral video, would we see the same kind of behavior? It’s why the confirmation hearings and the interactions, in general, have become such a spectacle. There is no interest in measured discussion and thoughtful disagreement.
A case can be made for a return to a political reality that is a bit more boring. This is what America desperately needs. The real question remains: is that what a divided, wounded country even wants?
Kimberly Ross (@SouthernKeeks) is contributor to the Washington Examiner’s Beltway Confidential blog and a senior contributor at RedState.com.
